Okay, here’s one of my favourite stories of how Twitter (or any related social media tool thingy) can work when a critical mass is reached.
At SXSWi Twitter just rules. Everyone, and I mean everyone, is using it to a degree where you can’t really imagine the conference without it.
At 10pm on Monday night, that’s 10pm, Alex, our hero from the last post, is walking down E 6th Street and notices that the Mooseknuckle bar is empty. He pops in and makes a deal with the owner to put some cash behind the bar. He then Twitters this message at 11.22pm.
Indyhall party at mooseknuckle if we get 100 people I’ll open a tab.
Stef noticed the Tweet and we headed down there to be greeted by about 50-odd people. By the time we left this had trippled at least. I found out later that the bar had filled to capacity and, though it pains me to use this metric as it’s kinda tired, Scoble turned up.
Which is not bad. But was it just Twitter doing this? Oh no. Imagine if I’d sent out a Tweet saying I was running a party in Austin. I might have gotten a few people coming along out of curiosity or politeness but nothing on this scale. It worked because Alex has a good reputation and reputation is all in this game. Not only does he have a good collection of people following his Twitter stream but they all know what he’s done for the community and feel part of that and so on.
The technology enables this to happen but it needs to be fueled by something more important – who it’s enabling. Or something like that.
I have to admit that following your exploits in Austin has been a fascinating experience. I remember you once saying to me when we had arranged to meet near the Bullring and were tracing each other down using our mobiles that before the technology was there we simply agreed on a time and place and kept to it.
I do recognize that it was extremely useful for the six or you to keep tabs on each others’ progress and experiences and of course the whole idea was to engage those who did not go to Austin. Working in near real time was certainly exhilarating if tiring!
The photo shows the use of a > sign. In the modern vernacular does this signify “Legacy greater than Currency” or “Legacy leads to Currency”? I’m interested because I find myself using both syntaxes from time to time.