That is why U r being able to produce such numbers. U r in a natural flow. Those who frequently peep into thread count actually struggle to produce it.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
That is why U r being able to produce such numbers. U r in a natural flow. Those who frequently peep into thread count actually struggle to produce it.
I know. Not thinking about the number of threads is the best way to produce more. It has to be a genuine conversation.
Yes, how absorbed we are in a conversation actually produces that numbers without evn bothered about that.
This campaign brought thread farming to the forefront. Number matters for now but not always
yes, thread farming will be there because there is a lucrative prize, some people might gamble their reputation as well.
True. What matters is the longevity of your reputation and the real engagement with others so that you create a brand value within the network.
There should be value addition in some form or the other on a daily basis from the engagement, otherwise, we have webbed a cliche that will keep on drying and will vanish ultimately.
But from Leofinance's perspective, they take numbers differently. Ad revenue, network effect, require numbers
It's not abt who is more philosophical or has more knowledge,it's about who is producing that network effect even from shit thing
That is right from the network effect perspective and I do not say that's bad either. The platform needs number and users.
Yes, otherwise, you can not market this product. Even though Twitter is an abode of celebrities, we do not define its network effect in that terms.
Quality will ultimately re-surface only after the network effect goes wild.
From a different angle, it has also created an opportunity for people to assess their strengths, which is actually a good thing. Users will get to explore what they are good at. That will pave the way for different silos of discussion.