Sure…..Twain's suggestions were already on RN's list of to-dos.

Just like user guides, hmmn? RN had a whole year (that's 12 months) of beta and no one in the team even thought of producing visual user guides to facilitate newbies. In fact, RN didn't even provide user guides until 4 MONTHS after its public launch.

Any idea why user engagement is down? Here's a clue: no one knows how to use the site — despite the UI redesign last summer. The company never explained it to them; that's RN's responsibility.

Yes, and of course spam detection was already on RN's list…….and is clearly NOT WORKING.

Why else is it that the core users continued to flag it for MONTHS. How is it possible Nova was unaware that a spambot set up several fake accounts with variations on his own name and posted items to do with him being part of “sexual swingers”. That was quite a few pages of porn spam, btw.

If the company didn't act on Twain's suggestions, why is it that within 24 hours all the spam she flagged was immediately removed?

Would you like to see the before+after screenshots?

Ditto for the ranking algorithm issue. Ditto info transparency. Ditto Nova finally communicating with the core users instead of being off in Twitter hype-ether. Ditto everything else here that's been listed.

We all know what the release cycles for Twine are, thanks.

“Inconsistent” may be the word.

It takes from April 2008 when moderation tools were first requested by Twain (and probably others before then) to March/April 2009 for users to maybe get them; we'll see with the next few releases.

Yet it takes a month to remove the rating systems which were introduced and then no one used because it interfered with the title editor. Or a week to fix the recent crash (or even acknowledge there was one). Or 1 minute to lock an a/c and completely eradicate 8 months of collaborative content.

As for your suggestion about “using established channels in place for reporting bugs and concerns”, please re-read properly:

http://xosfaere.wordpress.com/2009/02/27/twine-...

The author points out Twine lounge, which is where the core users provide feedback and constructive bug reports, is “a nursery”.

Plus RN has closed User Feedback (again). Wasn't that an established channel for company-user communications?

Plus please see Greg Boutin's point about how user queries to support and RN team go unanswered.

Oh and if the company didn't act on Twain's suggestions, why is it they finally agreed to talk with Greg only after she came onto this thread?

Or was that already on RN's schedules too? You may want to check but Greg writes that his questions went repeatedly ignored and he was (rightly) frustrated.

On the contrary to Twain's methods being totally ineffective, the fact you're continuing to comment says RN is paying extremely close attention to the ISSUES highlighted by her here.

Oh and in case anyone at RN has amnesia or Aspbergers (which may explain the inability to read users' sentiments and concerns) — unlike Twain since all of her points have been cogent, consistent and all about improving things for the community……..

Please remember —

RN locked her out of her a/c and decimated all the collaborative threads she spent 8 months building with other users, so….

Do you all seriously and logically think she can even go into Twine and call up the “report a bug” feature panel on Twine?!

Yeah Candice suggested that as the way for a core user to report the recent crash too. Problem? The core user couldn't even log into Twine, much less launch the reporting panel.

My goodness, there alone is the proof you haven't properly thought through the logic of your own reply!

No, Twain is not going to send an email to support@twine.com either because the last time she did that (to report RN's breach of user privacy for a private twine) no action was taken to remove the items and put them back into private viewing protection.

Ergo, Twine's company-user channels don't seem to be effective.

Now please compare this.

She comes here to flag the ridiculous spam that's accumulated on Twine — especially relating to her — and it gets removed within 24 hours.

She comes here to point out RN should be transparent with its traffic figures and Greg Boutin gets an interview.

Etcetera erratum.

These are not hypotheses. She has a maths degree. She can tell you all about hypotheses and corollaries, thanks, and RN's about hers (craziness etc.) don't stack up.

Wrt “big emotional disruption,” um…….RN did that to the core users when they closed User Feedback first time. RN also did that when they decimated those collaborative threads that took 8 months of really hard and joyful work between the core users. RN did that by pushing them onto a little private twine they regard as a “nursery”.

RN also do that now by letting spam or low quality content swamp twines which have been painstakingly nurtured since beta. RN also does that when it fails to properly and openly communicate to its users. RN also does that to users when it plays pick+mix with features instead of simply having strong core features that work consistently and properly as users would like.

Seriously, you have no idea what “big emotional disruption” really is.

It's a pity RN hasn't been able to read the sentiment of its users, including its strongest advocates.

If it had, it's unlikely Nova would finally have gone onto Aasemoon's twine and admitted he was unaware of a whole myriad of issues (technical as well as collective feeling).

Meanwhile, the core users have always been able to openly discuss issues with Twain, troubleshoot them together and she's raised them here since users don't seem to have been able to be raised on Twine (from concerns of being excluded).

If Twine has become the place where even the core users cannot speak up without fear of exclusion (and get the sense they're being marginalized into a private twine) or feel they're being properly listened to, then it's obvious that — unfortunately — Twine doesn't seem to have properly functioning “established channels in place for reporting possible bugs or concerns.”

That's not right.

It doesn't matter how snazzy the Semantic goodies are under the hood.

Genuine, open, mature, transparent and democratic communication channels with users are paramount. That too is the responsibility of whoever's responsible for user marketing.

Actually, Twain would like to commend Venturebeat for enabling this conversation.

It's certainly not one which she could have had on Twine. When she tried to query Twine's numbers before on Twine (a perfectly legitimate request), her comment was deleted by RN within an hour.

Ironically, the Semantic Web has Open Access data and the principles of the democratization of information at its core.

In any case, Twain is disappointed RN don't seem to “get it”.

The issues all revolve around RN not delivering on several fronts (features and community values) what users want and their inability to market and communicate effectively. The issues certainly don't revolve around Twain.

The fact that RN people have been tracking and commenting on this thread, only proves that has been and is an effective way to gain RN's attention about users' serious issues and its actions.

How does Twain know this?

Normally, RN people try not to comment on threads because they have this thing about trolls and not wanting to add any credence to anything trolls write.

This Twain person clearly cannot be a troll since so many RN people have come forth and written abnormally lengthy comments in reply to her analysis. Abnormally lengthy means they're giving it time and attention.

Thanks all the same, her approach is working just fine.

RN started off being aggressive-defensive and tried to sling mud at her (crazy etc.) and none of it could stick. Now they're trying to be conciliatory “You are not a bad person, but your methods are totally ineffective. Try a different approach.”

It's quite LOL, really.

Obviously they've changed their own approach. Twain's been consistent in hers.

Twain doesn't care about RN's hypotheses and nonsense about her.

She does care that RN had better improve its service, remunerates the core users for their contributions and makes the community what the core users originally envisioned and have worked so hard towards:

* smart
* open
* transparent
* democratic
* diverse
* collaborative
* fun

Mostly, deliver on SEMANTIC features that actually work.

Ciao.

***************

Oh and to Nova, you may want to tell RN people to stop commenting further on this thread.

After all, you wouldn't want to give this Twain person and the issues she's raising any attention, right?

For example the spam issue — the spam detection and deletion algorithms were in fact underway, and starting to run, prior to your ever mentioning the issue. Similarly the ranking algorithms issue, etc. etc. It's not helpful when you make a big emotional disruption over known issues that are already being worked on. If you really wanted to help you would just contact Twine support to find out if an issue was known before making such grandiose posts and trying to raise alarms.

The company did not act on your suggestions — it was already acting on those issues before you made your suggestions. Proof: It's not possible to code solutions that fast, yet they launched almost immediately as you point out. That's because they were already developed and in process of being launched prior to or simultaneously to your comments. Just because B follows A does not mean A caused B.

If you really want to be helpful, as you so often claim, then please use the established channels that are in place for reporting possible bugs or concerns. Then wait to hear back about whether they are already being fixed or what the response is. Threads like this are not the place for bug reports. The fact that you continue to post such hypotheses here is just proof that you are more interested in drawing attention to yourself than actually making any form of positive change. You are not a bad person, but your methods are totally ineffective. Try a different approach.

There are screenshots of RN's original nonsense rankings which the core users flagged. That's what's being referred to in the list of 5 observations.

Unfortunately, the inconsistency of what Actual Person wrote still stands:

“”The algorithm counts velocity of recent activity, as well as private items that a user has added or shared. You cannot judge a user by just their public items. Some users who appear to have only joined a few public twines, or added a few public items, actually have huge levels of private activity that you can't see. In addition, the algorithm only looks at the last 7 days of activity.”

Twine's own Top 100 page still says:

“The top 100 members are ranked based on the volume and popularity of the public items they contribute or share within the last two weeks.”

Moving forward, RN may want to make it clear which definition they're using for the ranking algorithm in their marketing comms.

CONCLUSIONS
============

“May we live in interesting times,” as the Chinese say.

Let's see what we've achieved for Twine users in this lengthy, often unproductive and yet necessary thread.

It's not about this Twain person at all. She's been focused on the issues, the users, their feature concerns and giving them due credit and attention.

(1.) SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT
—————————————-

It's now clear it's the core users who shape, steer and contextualize Twine in a good direction. Their list of contributions is substantial, over and above the content they link.

This information is now transparent for the whole Webspace.

Recently, RN chose not to listen to the core users' concerns so…
Twain had to speak up. She has a pre-existing commitment to core users to do so and honors those commitments, I hear.

(2.) SPAM REMOVAL
————————–

She noted the unacceptable levels of spam which is probably contributing to this faux “explosive growth” and which none of the core users want. Nova takes real and immediate action to remove and delete that spam and fake user accounts.

This is good.

Hopefully, RN is going to take spam filtering seriously now instead of Nova giving some “We have spam filters….”

(3.) INFORMATION TRANSPARENCY
———————————————

She flagged the issue of unacceptable user engagement drops and Nova finally concedes to an interview with Greg Boutin to improve transparency of information.

This is good too.

Only then can RN face up to its own realities and think through viable ways to increase and improve user engagement.

(4.) CEO PRESENCE + PARTICIPATION
———————————————–

She highlighted that Nova as CEO has to be present and be seen to be present, properly listening & engaging with core users, plus the need for tech team explanations and lo+behold….

Nova, James Todd and Scott White all comment on Aasemoon's twine in a way that's not been seen since Twine's pre-alpha/beta high points when 100+ comments of collective sense and symbiosis were the norms.

Open democratic communication channels are good, imo.

Hopefully, RN will figure out a workable way to re-open User Feedback.

(5.) ALGORITHM CREDIBILITY
—————————————

This too is related to numbers sanity-checking and reputation.

She points out the ridiculous new ranking algorithm which excludes the core users and therefore completely undermines Twine's reputation, and the ranking gets acted upon and restored to a more acceptable and reflective count which (rightfully) includes the core users.

OUTSTANDING ITEM
—————————

APPROPRIATE REMUNERATION FOR THE CORE USERS for their positive contributions (acting as community managers, consultancy focus groups, etc. — everything I've listed). Plus share of advertising revenue stream and any apps development.

For now, given Twine's small community size (approx 77,000 total sign-ups as of end-Feb; please see Greg Boutin's analysis — http://www.semanticsincorporated.com/2009/02/as...) which means advertisers are unlikely to be piling in this instant, we should give RN some leeway that they WILL figure out a way to incorporate remuneration and revenue share for core users into their business model.

All-in-all, ticking off the list, we're making progress in the right direction for both sides which is a good thing.

COMMITMENT TO USERS
——————————–

Actual Person may want to relay to Nova that Twain made a commitment to Twine's real users.

Nova may have written that he “totally agrees” with Chesterfield who wrote that he doesn't see the future of Twine with the core users (Rick, Jack, Bent, Aasemoon, Giorgio, JDP, Frank, Lynn and a whole host of other smart, democratic, mainstream and collaborative people).

We'll forgive Nova this lapse of judgment.

Twain's position has always been:

RN better hope the future of Twine is with these people because they're not only smart and innovative content contributors, they are also the sense-makers and the stewards of a constructive community ethos on Twine. They give Twine good values, good taste, good conversations, good humor and good insights.

They certainly do NOT give Twine or RN s***/ spam / spin, so in reciprocity, RN and Twine should not give them any.

Otherwise, Twain may get tough on Nova as per this thread.

NOVA'S NAME CALLING + OTHER NONSENSE
———————————————————

Well, he tried to discredit this Twain person by saying she's “crazy” and taking the thread off-issues etc etc etc.

Here's the undeniable fact and the lol.

He ACTED immediately on almost all of the points she raised which benefit users and the community, so who's the crazy one?

Nova actually takes this Twain person extremely seriously indeed, respects her “phenomenal brainpower” (his words, not her ego) and acts on her lead.

Please don't let any childish name-calling on his part trick any readers; that's his id @ work.

It's advisable to account for someone's id, but pay more attention to their actions.

Now, Nova knows fine well that name-calling doesn't achieve anything constructive. It's good he's now at least trying to re-focus and renew his commitment to users after these recent very public critiques (on and off-Twine).

As has been noted, the core users don't wish ill of anyone. They simply want tools that work and a community that's open, democratic and enjoyable. They don't want to be swamped with nonsense or poor quality people / content.

Some people on this thread may not appreciate or approve of Twain and her methods. I hear she tried to be reasonable with Nova and RN for 10 months in the interests of moving the Twine community and the Semantic Web vision forward.

To those offended by what may have seemed to be an aggressive tone because they don't know me or the trials+tribulations she's had with RN and Twine or the Nova-Twain dynamics, please excuse her directness.

What's been achieved matters more: RN is actually paying attention to users' concerns and trying to take action towards improving the service (spam removal, count credibility, comment moderation, more user controls, speed etc.).

Comment moderation is a feature Twain requested back in April 2008 so it's great to note it's on the schedule for the next one or two release iterations.

Maybe if it had been a feature in the first place, Twain may not have got into a whole myriad of issues with other users during her reasoning that SemWeb naysayers should simply give the technology a chance.

In any case, core users want to foster openness, democracy and collaboration on Twine. Moderation tools will help them keep out trolls so they can cultivate healthy threads.

See? It's all simple, sensible and reasonable stuff.

Sayonara.

Let me quote you directly:

“The algorithm counts velocity of recent activity, as well as private items that a user has added or shared. You cannot judge a user by just their public items. Some users who appear to have only joined a few public twines, or added a few public items, actually have huge levels of private activity that you can't see. In addition, the algorithm only looks at the last 7 days of activity.”

Now let me quote the RN message on Twine's Top 100 page directly:

“The top 100 members are ranked based on the volume and popularity of the public items they contribute or share within the last two weeks.”

I don't want to point out RN's inconsistencies, but…..

(1.) you say the count includes public and private items, RN's own blurb on its Top 100 page says it's only public items.

(2.) you say the count if for the last 7 days of activity, RN's own blurb on its Top 100 page says it's the last two weeks.

Let's also make these observations:

(1.) There was someone ranked at #13 who had shared 1 item. There are others listed who have shared 0 items.

Meanwhile, the core users share 10-20+ public items and make 5-10+ comments a day and they're not listed in the Top 100. They are also very active on private twines so if the count is indeed on the basis you say, they should be in the Top 100.

(2.) There are people on that Top 100 page who haven't been active on Twine for months. There are screenshots showing their activity from 6 months back and their activity now and the numbers of twines they've created and items they've posted are almost unchanged.

How is it possible people who've been inactive on Twine are listed in the Top 100?

(3.) RN says it wants to appeal to the mainstream audience and yet, for some strange reason (or RN's seeming “we'll handpick the Top 100″), there are quite a number of Semtech sector people there.

Meanwhile, the core users are the ones who created all the mainstream twines and all that velocity of activity.

What kind of message is RN sending out in its Top 100 selection? Well, you don't seem to want to show mainstream people as an integral part of your platform. You want to showcase the niche Semtech / AI people.

(4.) A fifth of the Top 100 is RN's own staff. This is supposed to be a consumer platform rather than a stage for staff, isn't it?

Or is user activity so low staff count has to be used?

(5.) Over-reaction is an emotional response from someone who has no rationale or analysis at their disposal.

I've just provided the facts, figures and contradictions in RN's own words and practice.

Frankly, the way RN is treating its core users, has marginalized and excluded them from the Top 100 in this ridiculous “let's invent a new Top 100″ way and continues to say one thing but do the other and not deliver does not help Twine at all.

Well, that hope of change and goodwill granted to RN didn't last long.

Does RN seriously think its new rankings algorithm is credible like its claims that traffic is not due to spam is credible?

Seriously, it's great to see the team finally tackle their less than transparent uniques numbers (including Nova's admissions to Greg Boutin that confirmed all of Twain's points about user engagement being at a 1/5 of its previous peak etc.) and for RN to try to reduce any over-eager counting of triples, s*** and spam……

However, this new algorithm is 24 hours old and is already opening RN up to even more questions. In fact, it's almost laughable.

Are they really trying to tell intelligent people that someone called Sean Doug can be ranked #3 having started 23 twines and only uploaded 11 items when every single one of the core users has (for some bizarre reason; we wonder what — maybe RN can't take their constructive comments) been dumped from the Top 100?

Core users who've started and joined HUNDREDS of mainstream twines, posted THOUSANDS of items, connected to HUNDREDS of other users, made THOUSANDS of comments, in fact…..their individual activity in one day is 5 times that of Sean Doug's.

Yes, we mean current activity and not some beta nostalgia.

If Top 100 rankings doesn't auto-correct and those core users aren't restored to properly and fairly reflect their level of activity…

Either there's something seriously wrong with the algorithm or RN are excluding the people who've made the “greatest contribution to Twine” (Nova's words, quote unquote). If this is the case, that reflects extremely poorly on user relations and marketing on RN's part.

Hopefully, that's not the case.

Hopefully, RN is magnanimous towards people who are responsible for populating the majority of content on Twine and who went out of their way to support Twine's progress (everything Twain has listed) rather than for RN to be mean-spirited, petty and vindictive.

Let's give them the benefit of the doubt, shall we?

After all, a few core users dropping out of the Top 100, fair play. We can all celebrate a new form of democratization of the ranking algorithm but every single one of the core users?!

Conversely, if it is the case that they have naturally dropped out of the Top 100 this means their level of activity and engagement must have dropped right off the scale.

QUESTION 1: isn't RN after all the user engagement they can get and keep?

QUESTION 2: what have they been doing to alienate the people who are normally their most avid, supportive and active users?

QUESTION 3: can they understand how the way they're seen to treat core users reflects poorly on the way their user services are seen to be generally?

Hopefully this case of no core users in the Top 100 is another temporary tech glitch because all Twine insiders know the core users should be in the Top 100, fair and square, based on their levels of activity which are certainly higher than the likes of Sean Doug with his 11 items.

Let's see what that algorithm's going to do: be credible or crock.

Twain knows who you are and your comment is appreciated.

Here's hoping Erickson is “solid as a rock” and that there will be no more crock towards users.

Here's hoping RN can steer the ship back from downstream and the s*** creeks and head upstream to the sense havens and the original collective destinations of the SemWeb and smart, quality services.

Here's hoping Twain will NOT have to defend herself or the other core Power Users again because other people want to make it a personality contest and not one focussed on the issues resolutions.

The issues are clear: s***, spam, spin, service crashes etc which are unacceptable to users.

This faux “explosive growth” nonsense should not be allowed to mask the realities of the serious fixes Twine platform needs nor the level of professionalism due towards its community.

These are issues raised persistently by the core Power Users who have always had Twine community's interests at heart. No, not the ones who want to make cheap potshots at Twain and whose words have no credibility or basis. She's cited very specific examples to support her extremely lucid, coherent and reliable analysis whilst they've suffered from amnesia, fuzzy logic and tried to divert from the issues.

The fact of the matter is the core Power Users are the ones who fostered the conditions for Twine to appeal to the mainstream. They are the ones who fought for open and transparent communication channels. They are the ones who proposed and lobbied for the features to work as they should. They are the ones who provided the quality content, the context and the commitment to making Twine the smartest and most collaborative community in the Webspace.

They are also the ones who were most consistently supportive of RN team.

Therefore, they have every right not be to marketed to with s*** videos, not to be subjected to spam and crap, not to get vacuous spin when what's appreciated is technical resolution and open communications, and to get Nova's proper attention and delivery of the service that is their standard expectation.

Twain, meanwhile, was indeed forced to “walk the plank” (twice) and she's overcome the freezing water and the sharks.

She's already on the sense havens, thanks.

That's where Twine needs to head for.

Maybe only then Mayer Spivack's post, 'The Twain shall meet at last!”

* http://artsandminds.typepad.com/artsandminds/20...

Direct quotes:

” Twine is both a revolutionary and a disruptive technology in syncretic combination.”

“Twine” solves the greater knowledge and information problem inherent within most areas of knowledge—that the twain never meet unless forced together by brilliant discovery, invention, or by lucky, observed accident. Orphan technologies will now find their relatives! Neglected and forgotten ideas will shine at last. Integrative insights will become beacons for the future.”

There is veracity in what Mayer Spivack says. He's spot-on about the syncretic potential of Twine.

However, he is also right to note that twain only meets when disparate fields of thinking are forced together.

Look at how Twain has had to apply her “phenomenal brainpower” (Nova's words writing as “power user”) to bang heads together and make sense of them.

She hopes you're all savvy now. She's waiting for you all on the sense havens.

Adieu.

(1.) Sequoia Capital's advice to deal with the downturn:

http://gigaom.com/2008/10/09/what-startups-can-...

Please note these particular tips on their list:

— Focus on building the absolutely essential features in your product.

— Be brutal when it comes to marketing — anything that isn’t working, cut it.

(2.) TechCrunch's layoff tracker:

* http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/10/17/keeping-co...

She posted those items, which were published on Gigaom and TC during the fortnight right before Twine's public launch, precisely to encourage RN to focus on getting features aligned and the marketing message ship-shape before it went out the door.

Not for a second did she think RN would allow its public launch to be accompanied with such low-quality stupidity as the “We organize that s***” video to be representative of what is a smart community.

Does anyone seriously think the “We organize that s***” video was good marketing?

Do people think the likes of Sequoia Capital or WPP or Apple would say it works and that it brands and positions Twine in a favorable way to survive the economic storms as well as make a statement about the SemWeb and the smart people involved in it?

Read the TC comments carefully. Quite a lot of people say they're none the wiser about what Twine is, how to actually use it, what its features are, it doesn't seem to be their sort of community after watching that video etc.

They don't have humor bypasses. They're talking common sense.

Exactly like Sequoia is when they provide tips to start-ups on how to survive this financing climate.

Twain is all for advancing innovative ideas as much as the next person. As a banker, she championed budgets and re-investments in tech companies and internal incubations that had technical merits, defined strategic paths to market and talented mgmt teams.

Heck, she even tried to turnaround co's that were heading for Chapter 7 bankruptcy because of market conditions and not because of lack of talent on the part of the techco.

However, she will write down and be tough on companies which have not converted consistent goodwill into ROI capital, user servicing or who have not adopted good practice when they've been given more chances to do so than most.

That's what Sequoia et al would do too. It's standard expectation and practice, actually.

Twine management clearly needs serious external support. Good visions and ideas without good implementation, observing SOP or “walk the talk” is not enough.

No one is wishing Nova and Jim or anyone at RN team any ill will for the vision or the idea that was originally explicated in Nova's post “Why Twine Interests Me”. In fact, the core Power Users went out of their ways to realize that vision and to be part of positive implementation.

The Power Users did not lose their bearings. RN team are the ones who seem to have uncontrollable propensities to steer towards the s*** and icebergs, leap before they think-through properly (ratings systems, twitter integration etc. failures) instead of towards the safety of havens, smart processes and other folk's sensibilities.

It isn't too late for RN. They just need to re-plot the course and set sail for starboard again.

Then they'll have a better chance of making their next round.

Here it's a case of “Bonne chance!” There are other semweb offerings being released in Q2 and Q3 of 2009 and they too will be chasing the same monies.

May the best quality offering win the money and the user members!

It's unlikely they would have put 100,000+ quality items onto the system, compensated for RN team's shortcomings (by providing consultancy services, by being community managers, by providing user guides, by handholding newbies, by troubleshooting bugs, by prioritizing feature improvements, and a whole host of other talents) or put up with being personally attacked by Twine's naysayers — if they were those types of people.

Actually, it is they who gave GENUINE GOODWILL — not simply in the form of empty words like, “Congrats,” “Mazel Tov”, “Jolly good show, chaps!”, “Bravo!” Their goodwill was actual, tangible and concrete.

It was their input that is the lasting contribution and not those of empty words.

They're the ones who set up twines to socialize it — make it a proper social / interest network — and to open it up to audiences wider than the tech geek Semantic researchers. Twines like Music, Jokes, Books, Health+Fitness, Politics, Election 2009, Global Financial Crisis, House+Home, Trawling the Net, Programming Everything, Cookery, Photography, Animation, Art etc. etc. etc. They're the ones who set-up twines and threads to try and INCREASE quality engagement on Twine — not only amongst themselves but consistently and constructively welcoming newbies.

They're the ones who created twines which would attract mainstream audiences. Not a single one of those Power Users created a twine called “Singularity” or “Semantic Applications” or “Kurzweil” so to suggest that they were obstructing Twine's move into the mainstream is simply…..INVALID and completely misinformed.

They're the ones who debated how the UX could improve and seamless integration in straight through links so that Twine would become more user-friendly, clearly explained and synch in. They did all this in the interests of making Twine as mainstream and functionally useful as Google Reader, Facebook and DIGG.

That Twine is now troubled has nothing to do with the constructive efforts of the Power Users to help it on that path.

It has everything to do with RN's poor policy decisions, repeated mistakes and its alienation of its own most ardent users, defenders and advocates.

All of which was avoidable. All of which is salvage-able.

If they will — with cogent thinking and collaborative effort — implement good practice.

That's what the core Power Users have been pressing for and trying to steer Twine towards all along.

A few tips:

(1.) Twain thinks you're very funny, have provided a lot of entertainment and she knows exactly who you are because you wrote “pardon my English all” and the only time Twain has ever used that turn of phrase — albeit in reference to another language that “Fake French Guy” would understand — was very recently on a private social network.

So touché!

(2.) It's not “Here here”. It's “Hear! Hear!” — that's what's said in Parliament.

Just so you know in case you want to try and impersonate her any further; she wouldn't make mistakes like that. She's particular about language precision as she is about getting everything else spot-on.

(3.) Twain has not written here as “Twain,” “The Real Twain” or any another version of Twain.

That's obvious because what Twain has written on this VB thread has been informed, analytical, cogent and focussed on the very real and serious issues RN team have to tackle and get right for its user members.

TYING IT ALL TOGETHER
====================

She's tied it all together, linked all the dots and frame-worked specific pragmatic solutions, actually.

(1.) Jamlin423 wrote:

“Also, the 2 “twines” that they're automatically inviting new users to join — “Get Started” and “Twine News and Announcements” — has only 1,100 and 9,400 members respectively, which means quite some users sign up but didn't bother to explore the site. (It's a bit complicated even for me whose job is scoping out web applications.)”

Twain has very specifically pointed out Twine marketing's failures to properly communicate with its users, get them to engage on the site or to provide proper user guides (leaving it to Power Users to handhold newbies when they're not RN employees or being paid for it; its not their responsibility, actually).

Naturally, Twine marketing's failures affects the engagement figures and explains how low they are. It's all inter-connected.

(2.) Greg Boutin made perfectly valid complaints about RN being less than helpful in providing information, transparency and in listening.

Twain has provided clear examples not only of RN policy decisions which have been counter-productive to company-community relations:

* closure of User Feedback by RN (repeating their mistakes)

* marginalization of the core users who know exactly what feature improvements will help all users

* spin & denial & character slurring from RN instead of them tackling the issues to benefit clarity of information and transparency for all

(3.) Bent refers to the lounge as a “nursery”.

Twain has been more than expressive about the need for RN to improve the professionalism and quality of service provision with which they treat ALL their user members.

For RN to come out and spin about their so-called “explosive growth” when someone like Bent and all the other experienced core users knows this includes a lot of crap, SEO spam, deadwood twines, a non-performing Interest Feed, periodic system crashes and lack of proper user engagement on a platform that was marketed by RN as a “smart system” is simply not good enough.

There's no “cultural friction”. There's a big gap between spin and delivery and user members want delivery, thanks.

CONCLUSION
===========

In seriousness, RN should get working on the 10 points of recommendation Twain made above.

Nova needs to stop playing Victorian father to his core user members: “See no evil. Hear no evil. Say no evil,” by banishing them to some nursery twine, and instead actually TAKE-IN what their concerns and improvement suggestions are.

He also simply needs to stop being a Twit and remember to be a Twinerian again. It is his company and his community after all and he has a responsibility to deliver to Twinerians.

Twain does not want to have to come onto any more public forums to demand for the removal of crap relating to her on Twine, to ensure the core users' concerns get properly heard and addressed, to set the record straight or to waste her time repeating herself about what constitutes standard GOOD operational practice and strategic implementation.

For the record she's a premier league corporate strategist. People do not get promoted into CEO-Chairman's Office of a Tier 1 bank, run e-Intelligence, be co-responsible for a US$billion valuation portfolio of tech investments by the age of 26 unless they are premier collaborators, thinkers and doers. Finance people also usually do not know how to code or anything about configuring Google Earth KPIs or kernels or weaving with Papervision3D in web design and Twain can.

If others can't stomach or commend that hard-earned success of hers which is the result of a LOT of collaborative effort and hard graft on her part, (and they choose instead to be petty and make character slurs) then they have small minds and pea-sized hearts and it's not her problem. It's their own immaturity, insecurity, ignorance and ego inadequacy issues manifesting.

So all the s*** and spam about her supposed craziness should just stop. Exactly like all the s*** and spam on Twine should stop.

The Twine journey is over as far as she's concerned. She has no need for nurseries, no clues people or for nonsense.

The Twain journey continues happy and anon, striving towards much better on something she's building and that's much more meaningful and sense-making than Twine.

PEACE, in the words of one of the best Twinerians.