Majority Rules: What Does Twitter’s Reply Change Mean For You?
Yesterday, Twitter made what it termed a “small settings update” to their system. Specifically, they’ve updated the Notices section in your Settings (on Twitter.com) so that you now no longer have any control over the replies you see on the network.
Previously, there were three settings available to users:
- all @ replies
- @ replies to the people I’m following
- no @ replies

Option two is the default, and has been since December, 2007. Prior to this, there was only one setting available, and it was option one.
Now in your Notices page there are no settings available for this at all. Twitter has re-configured the system so all users can only see replies from people they are following.

(Note, with amusement, Twitter’s ‘help’ gaff on the right sidebar. The link also leads to a now outdated help page.)
This has, as you would imagine, caused a bit of a stink. But to whom? Who is affected, how will this change impact the Twitter stream, was Twitter right to act this way, and what, if anything, can be done?
A Little Bit Of Twistory
Way, way back in a time before dinosaurs, religion and bacon double-cheeseburgers – December 5, 2007, to be precise – Twitter made some changes to their reply settings. This was when we were first given the opportunity to control which replies you received on the network, as per the image I presented earlier.
On May 12, 2008, Twitter CEO Evan Williams (@ev) wrote a blog entry that went into a lot more detail about how replies worked, predominantly to address “a lot of confusion” about the feature. Williams explained how this was now an important part of the network and went on to mention that 98 per cent of Twitter users left their replies on the ‘default’ setting – that is, they only saw @ replies to the people they are following.
If you read the comments above Ev’s announcement, you’ll note that it was warmly received.
Note that this was a year ago exactly to the changes that have just been made.
Who Does This Affect?
The people most affected by this change to the system are obviously those who selected and enjoyed the option to see all @replies. This includes:
- Those who enjoyed Twitter as a medium for chat
- Those who like to follow conversations in detail between all involved parties
- Those who used the all replies setting to meet new people
- People who complained about ‘reply spam’
Who Does This Not Affect?
Almost everybody else. As mentioned above, back in May last year 98 per cent of Twitter users had their account set to its default settings. Twitter’s popularity has completely boomed in the last 12 months and one imagines that number is probably closer to 99+ per cent now. These people will not be affected in any way by the changes.
Indeed, while it is fair to say that the 1-2 per cent of Twitter users who did use and like the all replies feature represents hundreds of thousands of users, this tweak from Twitter won’t impact them in the way in which many of them (as well as many websites and commentators) are concerned.
There’s A Small Chance You Might Have Been Doing It Wrong All This Time
Here’s the thing: any message that starts with an @ on Twitter is a reply. It’s always been a reply; it’s meant to be a reply. Twitter recently adjusted the home page so that the @Replies tab became @Username, and it now lists any mention of your name in any tweet, as opposed to just those that began with it. But that didn’t change this one simple thing: start a message with @, and it’s a reply.
What this means is that whenever you open a tweet with @, Twitter reads the submission as a reply. This:
@Sheamus is a great guy!
Is a very different message to this:
I tell you who's a great guy - @Sheamus!
Twitter absorbs these messages in different ways. The first, the reply, will be seen by the following people:
- @Sheamus
- Anybody who is following @Sheamus and the sender of the message
- Anybody who, previously, had Twitter set to see all replies
Everybody else – that is, those 98+ per cent of Twitter users who left their account on the default settings, and the entire network now, will not see this message.
(You can of course see all messages using Twitter search or by visiting a user’s profile, but these are different to the basic way the system works.)
As for the second message, which is a more standard tweet, the following people will see it:
- @Sheamus
- Anybody who is following the sender of the message
Because of the way the @Username part has been positioned, Twitter accepts the message as a standard tweet, and not a reply. However, due to the changes made in the replies/mentions part of the network, I will still be notified of this tweet in my @Sheamus tab (on Twitter.com, or in my choice of Twitter software client).
The changes made to Twitter now mean that all messages that start with @ will be visible only to the recipient and anybody who is following that person and the sender of the message.
Hence, if you want, for example, to make a recommendation about somebody to your followers, do not start the message like this:
@Sheamus is somebody we should all follow!
Start it like this:
We should all follow @Sheamus!
(You may like to do this now for practice.
)
What About #FollowFriday?
In my article on #followfriday within this blog, I added a tip at the bottom that states the following:
When making #followfriday recommendations, don’t start your tweet with @username. Otherwise, Twitter thinks it’s a reply, and only that person (or another user who is following you both) will see it. Start the tweet with #followfriday or some text (i.e., ‘I recommend @userone @usertwo @userthree #followfriday’).
This was always good practice and is especially so now Twitter has made this change. Despite concerns, this adjustment does not impact #followfriday in any way – unless you’ve been doing it wrong all along.
Why Has Twitter Done This?
It is perhaps a case of majority rules. If 98+ per cent of people do not use a feature and Twitter believes that it is not important, then it is perhaps understandable why it would be removed.
There is some speculation that Twitter has done this to appease the influx of celebrity users to the platform, as these people really don’t want to be bombarded with replies from all and sundry, and certainly not the proles. Of course, this argument makes no sense, as all the celebrities who signed up for Twitter in the last year – and this includes Ashton, Oprah, Shaq and many others – would have benefited from Twitter’s default replies setting, and only seen messages from those folk they were following themselves. This, of course, as we have studied in the past, is often a very small number.
Another reason why Twitter might have implemented this adjustment could be to eliminate complaints about reply spam. Reply spam is something that only really affects people who previously chose to see all replies on Twitter, and it occurs when one of the accounts they are following is extremely chatty with their network to a point where the recipient – who, remember, has made the choice to see all replies – find the level of tweets uncomfortable. This will often lead to a complaint to the Twitterer, or an unfollow.
I say: surely when you signed up for ALL replies, you expected and knew you were going to receive ALL replies? If you then go on to complain about receiving ALL the replies, you haven’t really got a leg to stand on.
Either way it can and should, as said, be easily resolved with an unfollow, which remains the single-most powerful feature on the Twitter network.
What Will Change?
Predominantly, the way many people have tweeted in the past. I think from reading the Twitter stream this morning this adjustment has revealed something of a fallacy about the network – that everybody, or certainly most people, had their settings configured to see all replies. As we’ve seen, virtually nobody did, at least relatively, and while it’s evident that many ‘power-users’ liked the all replies feature, most of them were able to do this because they did not follow a large amount of people. As mentioned, the all replies setting was the only option way back when, and many of the power-users on Twitter have been around since these times, and it is perhaps all they have known (or chosen to know).
(Of course, and if I may be so bold, these folk often ‘shout’ the loudest too, making the event seem perhaps of greater magnitude than it actually is, certainly for most of the network, who will see no changes at all.)
Indeed, I’ve polled my own followers this morning and checked out the follow counts of others I’ve seen who are concerned about the change, and in the vast majority of cases, with a few notable exceptions, all of these users were following a modest amount of people – typically a few hundred, with the exceptions following a thousand or more. Reading some of the tweets of these individuals, many have made observations about how they must “enjoy the pain”.
I think one could create an argument that new followers across the network may well dip, if only a little, as many people who selected all replies used it as a way to meet and follow new users. Of course, this will only have a 1-2 per cent impact, at best.
It is also worth pointing out that the option to receive no replies has been removed as well. I’m really not sure why anybody apart from perhaps a bot or other automated account would choose this feature, but there is some talk, as above, that a few of the A-listers set their accounts like this, which perhaps further underlines how some of these individuals either do not or will not get or accept how it’s supposed to work.
Predominantly, of course, those users that had their account set to all replies previously will immediately start to see a lot less in their timeline. For many this will be unwelcome; for others, who were perhaps not aware that this could be adjusted, it might be of some relief.
If you enjoyed reading all the ripples of a conversation, including the comments from those folk you were not following, you will now have to follow these people – and therefore, theoretically, everybody – to get the same effect.
If you were somebody who enjoyed meeting new people thanks to the cross-replies of your friends, this experience is now lost. In many ways, this perhaps increases the validity of something like #followfriday.
Will It Change Back?
It might. There’s certainly enough support and anger at this decision – the #fixreplies hashtag has made the top of Twitter’s trending topics feature and surely will be brought to their attention. You can voice your concern by using it, too, in your tweets.
Historically, however, Twitter has not been one to reverse even the boldest of adjustments, but there is always a possibility for exception.
What Should Twitter Have Done?
Absolutely nothing. The option to select which replies you want to receive should have been left as it was. Any changes they wanted to make should have been in the form of richer tutorials and documentation explaining how the different kinds of replies impacted the user – it was only, I dare say, confusing to some because the accompanying ‘help’ was so poor.
As we have seen, only a very minor part of the Twitter network enjoyed, or were even aware of the facility to see all replies, but to blanketly snuff them out with this “small settings update” seems at best a little casual, and at worse amounts to complete and total indifference.
I do not, and have never aside from experimentation, set my configuration to receive all replies. It’s just far too much noise for me, and I would assume is the case for anybody who follows X or more people (where X, in my case, was much above 500 – you will have your own threshold). But the choice to do this should be left with us, not Twitter.
@ev, @biz, @jack, @stop and the rest of Twitter’s elite have, at best, a very modest impact and interaction with the Twitter stream. Indeed, I don’t believe it would be unfair to say that, for the most part, the bulk of their tweets are very much of the increasingly-derided, “What are you doing?” variety. To this day, I remain unconvinced that, perhaps a little like J.J. Abrams and Lost, they are not making it up as they go along.
Either way, I am not sure they are the greatest judge of what is best for the Twitter network as a whole. Or even, for that matter, the 1-2 per cent who will be most impacted – and upset – by these changes. In the future, I would welcome and hope to see a more two-way discourse with a variety of representatives from across the Twitter spectrum before changes of this magnitude are made – at the very least, it would be nice to know they are coming just a little in advance.
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!






Thanks for eloborating the issues on #fixreplies Sheamus.
You make it clear to those that don’t understand the usage of replies.
RT for you
Thanks Roseli – always appreciated.
This explains why twitter has suddenly gone so quiet. I’ve used it for a year or so, but only follow about a dozen people and a similar number follow me. I previously saw about 10 to 30 tweets per day, but now it’s about four.
I can imagine twitter fading awy for me now, like telnet, irc, icq, messenger, myspace and facebook before it.
Sad.
The other option is to follow more people. I dare say it’s perhaps a little radical, but I’m sure you can easily find another dozen or so folk who pique your curiosity.
they might only be 2% of people who use the function, but the way #fixreplies and #tweetfail are trending, i have to think they’re an influential 2% – perhaps even a large proportion of those who talk, instead of just lurking.
I think a lot of that 1-2 per cent are vets, and those who would have been used to the original settings for @replies, which was all, and probably changed back to that when Twitter gave the option (in May ’08).
As these people would have been around a long time, in some cases since the beginning, they are likely to be vocal about such an enforced tweak. But there absolutely are some ‘big’ names amongst the unhappy.
i’ve only been using Twitter since mid March 09 – and frankly, without the see all @ replies option, it loses most of its charm
Sheila (@stinginthetail)’s last blog post..The future’s so bright…
yeah they could have always drawn our attention to the options to change @replies settings. I am gonna miss stumbling across new folks because of a back-asswards feature implementation.
I have an idea for what should twitter have done… and perhaps should still do…
Instead of the three choices of “follow”, “not follow”, or “block”, there should be a fourth: “follow @replies too”.
Some people are so eloquent with their @replies, they aren’t worth missing! Others are so prolific with their @replies, they aren’t worth following! Or weren’t, I guess, since this change “fixes” that. /sigh
I normally like to keep an open mind about changes, but this one is still more annoying than helpful.
That’s not a bad idea, Qrystal – being able to do things on a ‘per user’ basis is often preferable to a sweeping, default-all choice. Possibly this is the compromise Twitter is looking for, in light of the #fixreplies trend.
Now that is a great idea and would be a definite move forward.
I have (had) my stream set to see all @ replies but it would be better if I could pick and choose which people were included in that.
And while they are at it please can we have an easier way to sort through followers/following? A chronological list is not the easiest way and it gets worse the more you add to it.
@virtualewit’s last blog post..virtual-e business park online
I agree about sorting followers. They’d have been far better implementing an efficient management system that allows you to view your network by name, number of tweets, total followers, date added, conversations held, etc, than this.
Greetings
Excellent analysis of issues and work arounds but the fix was a solution in search of a problem. I have about 1200 folks I folow but only few of them post meaning even with a K of people my stream was not overloaded
The easter egg functionality of twitter was always the unexpected errant reply that appearing in your timeline led to a new follow a new friend that was pure gold and I shall miss it
But, but I used option 3
;-( now I have a gazillion stupid @replies on my page – I hate it.
as an option it was fine – how does it benefit Twitter to remove the option? ease of updating the software? money? I wish they’d say why they removed the CHOICE. It’s pretty annoying for those of us that ‘got it’ in the first place!
Good article.
Perhaps I am getting this wrong, but if a twitter user does not follow me (lets say BBCClick) who are looking for replies to their updates (but clearly can’t be expected to follow all of their 585905 followers). If I reply using the twitter reply button, do they receive it?
If there is a reply button that generates a reply that goes nowhere, then twitter have broken their own UI.
Ray, this change doesn’t affect the way replies normally move throughout the network. You can still @reply, and be @replied, by anybody, follower or otherwise. So, using your example, BBCClick will still receive your replies (and anybody elses).
What has changed is that unless somebody is following both you AND BBCClick, they now cannot see any replies you send to each other. For most users – 98 per cent, if we accept the stat above – this will be entirely normal, and they will not notice any difference in their stream.
Ok, I might not agree with it, but I get it.
The main issue I have with it is that I follow a lot of people, when I do follow them, who answer a lot of question. As they may not change their method of replying, I’ve lost access to 99% of replies by @NASA and similar. Not to mention that I follow a lot of other types who answer questions.
Thank goodness that 98% of the people didn’t use the service the way I did; now I’ll just have to enjoy knowing no answers to questions I may not’ve had just yet. I’d have never known the joy of silence without them.
Again, it suggests that the best thing for Twitter to have done was nothing. The trend opposing this is growing significantly, and there’s certainly a chance that they may revert back, if not entirely, to something similar. Personally I like the idea to pick and choose the level of replies you want to see on a per user basis.
Meantime, you can easily follow all of @NASA’s replies – and anyone else – by setting up a search pane in TweetDeck or Seesmic Desktop (or, indeed, on Twitter search). It’s not elegant, but it’s a useful workaround.
It’s not fair to dismiss them, but I’ve seen plenty of bits dismissing my views, so why not? Being sullen and vaguely antisocial may not get results, but in this case, as you’ve said, it’s highly unlikely any real result in my favor will be achieved. Childish, I’m sure, but it feels good.
If they wanted to allow the ability to pick and choose the level of replies someone sees on a per-user basis, they should’ve implemented this at the same time as they stuck their finger in the electrical socket with this one. I see nothing that indicates that this is their end goal, or a plan that they’ll be following. Of course, it doesn’t matter what someone likes, if it’s not 99% of people.
And, yeah. It’s a useful workaround, or would be, if I didn’t have to make somewhere near twenty of them.
I removed my ‘dismiss’ part because I wondered if I’d misread your comment, but guess not.
I think there’s a reasonable chance Twitter will counter this with some new options – the momentum behind the #fixreplies trend is that strong, and @ev has said they are “considering alternatives”.
Whether they actually are, of course, remains to be seen, but I think they’re aware that it’s all too easy to suddenly do a Facebook.
As for groups, just set up a search pane looking for multiple users with the OR function, i.e., “@username1 OR @username2 OR @username3″ etc.
Yeah, for me, it’s often easier and more accurate for others to attribute my comments to malice; I try not to mis-communicate.
I’ll admit, the turnaround at least to a “We’re taking this very seriously” was almost admirable. It would’ve been better if they actually said something beforehand rather than “Oops we didn’t realize that people were actually using that feature.” Especially when their rationale was that they were going by the percentages. That just smacks of laziness and a disconnect with the userbase. One would think that someone who created a social networking tool would be competent enough to attempt to communicate with their users to make sure that transitions and issues were addressed without a massive explosion of internet rage.
It’s a stupid newbie mistake by people who should know better. Even if they’re aware of how easy it is to go Facebook, they seem to be willing to dance on the line as much as possible.
And, you are aware of how utterly irritating a search pane with @NASA is, right? Especially on a day when a mission is going on. Thousands of RT @NASA. A very convenient workaround! (Note: Being facetious.)
Remember, searching @NASA is finding everything mentioning it. If you want to remove retweets, just add -RT to the search.
Also there’s to:NASA and from:NASA that might help cull the crap!
Advanced search rocks.
Qrystal’s last blog post..My Teaching Philosophy
Excellent post, thank you.
I was one of the 98% – but didn’t realise it! It explains why Twitter was acting in a way I didn’t think it was designed to.
And now I don’t have the option…
Twitter is all about the conversation, and it is weaker without that option.
Patrick’s last blog post..Lord Layard on Happiness
Perhaps, but you can still engage in your discourse with your own network. That hasn’t been lost, nor, I think, could it be taken away.
They should have left it alone. Everyone uses twitter differently and has different motivations to do so. That Twitter or various blog pundits (not you) have the nerve to tell me that they know best how to use MY twitter or that they know better is beyond my scope of comprehension. Presumption at it’s finest.
Please note my emphasis in the quote above. I used to work in PC support and can I tell you the sheer number of people who were flabbergasted to find out that they could change their monitor resolution from the default to something that suited their needs. It never occurred to them or if it did, they didn’t know how to do it or were afraid to mess with the settings of their OWN computer. This is absolutely no different.
And, everyone keeps leaving out another disenfranchisee of this situation. The poor guy who didn’t want to see ANY @replies.
So, what’s happening now? The ticked off people are using workarounds which are now flooding the streams of the very people that Twitter was trying to “protect”.
Good job, twitter.
I concur, Karina. Leaving it alone was the best option, as I said in my piece. What is done is done, however, and it will be interesting to see how Twitter moves forward from here. That is, do they do a complete 180, or do they propose/introduce an alternative way to monitor all replies?
There’s certainly a lot of momentum behind the #fixreplies trend. Unless it completely dies out within 24 hours or so, I don’t see how they can ignore it.
Yes – I am that ‘poor guy’ that didn’t want to see the @ replies – I enjoyed the simplicity of the ‘status’ only – like a totally clean version of Facebook. I followed people that had witty status updates – over 200 people updating two or three times a day was enough for me! Now I have 1000s more @replies to trawl through, I’ve had to unfollow one person because of it – and now I’m leaving Twitter for a while to see if they fix it. For me, removing the 3rd option has made Twitter unusable.
Just telling us of the choice and making option 2 the default would have surely been the simplest option.
Lot’s of people have said – “hey it’s free quit whining” but if anyone knows somewhere I can get the same thing (as the old twitter!) with as many people on it – I’d pay a modest some to join it!
Twitter have been listening, it seems, but their response is even more confusing.
Seems to me Twitter pushes the whole “follow celebrities” thing pretty hard. Most celebrity tweets seem to be replies to other peoples tweets. I think a lot of people who use twitter are going to be disappointed that their favorite celebs are not going to show up on there streams anymore. After all most celebrities don’t follow a tenth of the people that follow them.
So now “We’re getting a ton of extremely useful feedback”
Gee, ya think? In order to have either of the other TWO options (all or none) turned on, that means you have to be proactive about it which means you are probably a generally more active twitterererer. The claim is that they have 6,000,000 accounts. 2% of that is 120,000 people who are active twitterererers.
Over the past 24 hours 120,000 people have found out that they do not count in the eyes of Twitter. I suspect that “getting a ton” is an understatement.
And, to echo others. I would LOVE to see a usage breakdown of the 98% vs the 2%. Mostly when people create an acocunt and then quit, they don’t delete ‘em. How many of that 98% are dormant or occasional accounts vs the 2% ?
Tweaking the @replies per user would be fabulous. There are some users who have fabulous public posts, but can have multiple virulent @replies. Most of the people I follow I enjoy all the @replies and keep finding cool info and new friends. But, those few I have made the choice to unfollow rather than subject myself to the whole of their personalities. Something that would be resolved by per user settings.
But, if they’re not going to do that (which would probably cut back a lot of traffic, then they need to not take away my ability to choose my friends in the way that I want to.
With the changes, Twitter has gone from “social networking,” to another instant message system- only more boring. I was one of the 1-2% who enjoyed seeing @replies to those I did not follow-mainly because I found people with the same interests, so I did follow and pure entertainment at times. I am now watching people I follow either reply to me, or, chat with themselves. This is why I’m boycotting for 24 hours. Whether others choose-note the word CHOOSE to join me, or not, it’s their decision. Maybe a day with few Tweets would wake the idiots up and realize, without us, (mostly bloggers)-there would be no Twitter.
Beth’s last blog post..24-Hour Twitter Boycott.