Why do I hate DMs?
I have been thinking of putting together a full-fledged page on “My Rules of Engagement” (e.g. my criteria for following, my rules of commenting, etc.). But I really don’t have the time, and I think there many rules I have, so it’d take me a while to put together. All of the above said, there is ONE thing that is, and continues to be my eternal pet peeve – the direct message. I hate them. I hate them SO much. And for so many reasons.
Primarily, because it makes a really bad assumption – that I am going to read it, because, “obviously, I’m on Twitter all the time” (I am not, you see – right now, I pre-schedule my tweets much more than I used to last year).
First off, I recognize that I don’t follow everyone back. I don’t have the brain capacity to do so. I follow about 650 people and that’s about 500 too many. And the problem is, I do follow some “DM-happy people”. You know, those who send DMs for just about everything. I have been THIS close to unfollowing them all. There’s only about 10 people in the whole world whose DMs I pay attention to. The rest, I ignore.
There are many types of DM that I really dislike, and some that I do enjoy. I dislike DMs that ask me stuff that can be public. “How are you doing?” is not precisely something that needs to be hidden from the world. “Thank you for that retweet” is not something that needs to be hidden from the world. But, seriously – do you need to thank people in private? As my parents taught me, scold people in private, praise or thank them in public. If you were asking me “I heard that you have been feeling depressed, are you ok?” by direct message, sure (and even then, I’m so terribly public most likely I wouldn’t mind if you asked me by @ mention). Or if you are feeling down, of course I’ll respect your privacy. Or stuff that is just between you and I, and that is really private. For example, if you really didn’t like someone’s behavior with regards to how they treated you. That’s confidential, and personal. We can talk about that via DM.
Lots of people think “well, Raul, there are so many things that can be resolved so fast via a very quick DM“. That’s not true. If you have access to my DMs (e.g. if I follow you), in all likelihood you have my cell number. Which means, you can text me. Which means, I’ll get it pretty much instantaneously because, contrary to Twitter, I *do* carry my cell phone EVERYWHERE. AND I can respond to you pretty much immediately.
I know, I have my rules, my quirks and I know that many people get annoyed by them. So be it. If you want to reach me, there’s my contact form, there’s email, there’s a text. Heck, there’s even a public @ reply. But DMs, I really, really don’t need to clog my DM inbox. Plus, can you imagine if Wikileaks released my DMs to the public? There would be a diplomatic debacle! 🙂
PS – Before anybody thinks that this note is aimed at anyone in particular, IT’S NOT. My beef with DMs and DM-ing stuff that can be public has been publicized widely, both on Twitter and here on my blog.
At that time, I posted:
I am fiercely protective of my email (I receive hundreds of them) and of my DMs. I find direct messages, intensely private. Because I live such a public life (and because I don’t give a damn if people think I clog their feeds – after all, it’s their choice to follow me, and being too noisy on Twitter is one of the characteristics that define me), I use DMs only, and only ever when I am saying something that REALLY needs to be private. Otherwise, I live (as my friend Chris Walts says) on my @ replies tab.
When I follow someone, I give them access the capability to send me a direct message. I hope and expect that they are judicious in their use of DMs. This may sound awful, elitist, snobbish or whatever. But it’s how I feel. I don’t force anyone to follow me. But when I choose to follow someone, I choose to give them access to the possibility of telling me stuff in private that they might not want to have on public streams (and that is of very confidential nature!). I trust them, and implicitly, I expect them in return to make the best use of that access.
I also unfollow most people who unfollow me not out of a “THERE, if you unfollowed me, I can unfollow you too”. I unfollow them to remove their ability to send me a private message. It puts us back again on an equal ground.
One of the reasons why I spend SO MUCH TIME on Twitter is responding @ replies, and I try to make a point to respond to each and every one, because I feel that, even if I don’t give everyone access to my private DMs, I give everyone equal access to a conversation with me.
Great points you’ve made Raul. I also dislike DMs for anything but very personal stuff. And like you, I prefer a text message or even better a phone call.
My biggest beef about dms though is getting them from people who I follow but dont follow me back and thus can’t reply. I blame twitter for that though. I don’t understand why they chose to build the tool like that.
I also really dislike getting email request via dm. I find it a bit troubling when someone can’t do a quick google search and find my email. I think that’s just plain lazy.
Not to mention not every Twitter client does a great job of managing DMs, including Web Twitter.
I hate, hate, hate getting “how are you doing today” via DM. It says “Hi there, I don’t want to be seen talking to you.”
I don’t care what the sender intended. That is the message they actually managed to send.
Oh, and I actually like getting dms saying “dm me back” from people who aren’t Following me. It gives me a chance to say “Yo, Clueless! That’s not how this works” and of course I must do so in public, since I can’t DM them.
Raul,
You did right in calling out how much DMs are a bother to you. Annoying DMs can be like annoyance phone calls of yore or those unwanted telemarketing calls. It is important to have your own standards for Twitter behavior and as a popular blogger to communicate them.
But are you saying your position should be standard Twitter protocol? Or even that a standard Twitter protocol should exist?
Not everyone is on Twitter for the same reasons, and not everyone is there to live a completely public life. Some are marketers, some are personal brands, some are academic researchers, others are there just to promote their content and then some just like to hang out. That is their right. Twitter behavior is as diverse as the people using it. Just because you are having a Twitter conversation doesn’t mean you give up privacy completely.
I ask you because I’ve noticed a tendency for absolutist positions regarding behavior on social media (You MUST integrate Facebook and Twitter, you MUST NOT protect your tweets), and I think it can be a mistake. It can appear oppressive. (Of course, I am one who thinks Julian Assange’s brand of anarchy, taken to its logical conclusion, is dangerously oppressive.)
You are clear about your position and it works for you, and I understand there is DM abuse out there. Believe me, I will never send you a DM! But in Twitter’s early days DMs were part of the fun and were very efficient (“DM me if you are interested in this job.”) and for some people they still are.
As in all things Twitter, there is the potential for abuse, e.g. blurting, noise, excessive RT and general value-less content. I might not want to annoy people following me with tweets that are really only directed at one person and that, because of my relationship to that person, are entirely justified as DMs. Or perhaps simply because I am not as public a person as the next guy.
I do want to receive DMs from journalists, close friends and people who want to get in touch. I don’t mind if they are too lazy to look up my email because what I care about at the end of the day is the human connection.
I’d rather a DM than a phone call almost any day, as the call will take up much more time and a DM I can choose not to answer or answer when I have a moment.
Different strokes for different folks.