Friday, December 9, 2011

Triberr #BookburningChat Monday 9 PM EST

Triberr doesn't really have a book burning chat on Twitter, as far as I know. I don't participate in any book burning chats. But now I have your attention...
For those unfamiliar with Triberr, Triberr is a mutual tweeting collective designed to provide increased exposure for bloggers. Tribes are organized by loose (or stronger or looser) parameters. Tribal chiefs invite bloggers to join the tribe(s) based on fit. All tribe members agree to tweet links to blog posts by tribe members, thereby exposing the blog to many other potential readers. 
Meeting Standards.
My first week in Triberr (back in the good old days when Triberr had an autotweet option) I was taken aback when a tribe member referenced reviewing posts for suitability. I was invited and accepted into my tribe, Passionate Parents, based on parameters. The chief felt I met tribe requirements and by accepting the invite I had agreed to blog within the general parameters. Since blogs are about ideas there is an acknowledgment that posts could vary from tribe criteria. Common sense should direct bloggers to self-limit variations from tribal norms. I reject the notion my post requires review a priori. The concept that a tribal colleague should assume my post pass a litmus test is a bit offensive. As a new tribe member, I held my tongue. I'm glad I did. The tribe member I mentioned has since left the tribe having not enough time to review all tribe posts for fitness. My views are way up. Triberr is performing for me.
source: morgueFile
You Must Agree.
As chief of my own tribe, Renaissance Roundtable, I often troll the #Triberr hashtag looking for potential tribe members. I saw a tweet about reviewing posts  to tweet "what I agree with". I'm not sure what I find more troubling: the idea a Twitter following thinks with one mind; the idea a Twitter following is so fragile as to wilt should they encounter a contrary idea; or the idea that a Twitter following is hypercritical of a tweeted link.

The best way to approach the concept of "disagreeable posts" is to tweet the link, note your thoughts in the comments and let your Twitter following do the same. Protecting a following from a contrarian idea is to allow that opposing opinion to flourish. Revealing and then challenging a disagreeable thought allows that disagreeable concept to be debunked. So protecting your following in fact does the opposite.

Feel free to do as you wish, but I think blogging is about ideas. The only fear of differing opinions is that your opinion might not hold up.


  1. here here. I could say more but it would just be some variation of "I couldnt agree more".

  2. Dino,
    Who am I to argue with the Chief of Chiefs? Thanks for stopping by to add your support. If it's not obvious, I am lovin' Triberr.