Regulars Cyberbiochemist The Seven Deadly Sins of Twitter Clare Sansom When I last covered Twitter for the Cyberbiochemist in 2010, I was something of a newbie: my own Downloaded from http://portlandpress.com/biochemist/article-pdf/35/6/52/5393/bio035060052.pdf by guest on 30 September 2021 (Birkbeck College, London) account was less than 3 months old. Now 3 years later in this ‘Seven Deadly Sins’ themed issue I am following it up by looking at pitfalls for Twitter users to avoid. As anyone who has looked into Twitter will know, the key Wilde would have had with Twitter, and Oscar Wilde difference between it and other social networking sites is, of course, famous for his insults. I can positively is that relationships are not (or at least not necessarily) enjoy this type of Twitter insult, but far too many are reciprocal. Unlike Facebook or LinkedIn, when you click unspecific and gratuitous. A tweet that reads simply “XX the button to follow a Twitter account the owner of that is a moron” – and I have read these – will cause me to account will just get a message with your basic details and sigh deeply and press the ‘unfollow’ button: even when can choose whether or not to follow you. XX stands for Michael Gove. And anyone using Twitter at all seriously will want Sloth is a medieval word for simple laziness. You to maximise their following. Unless you are a household might think that a lazy Twitter user is one who follows name – or, I suppose, your large family and network accounts without posting their own tweets. These users of close friends are all enthusiastic tweeters – the main are analogous to ‘lurkers’ on email lists and bulletin way that people will decide whether to follow you is by boards, and this is a perfectly legitimate (if sub-optimal) looking at your profile to see what you’ve been saying. way of using Twitter. However, no lurker – even a Annoying tweeters are fairly easily identifiable; here I try celebrity lurker, if such a person has ever existed – will to map some of the worst of their bad habits on to the attract followers. Where lurkers stray into sinful territory original medieval deadly sins. it is through failing to understand this simple point. If Let me start with Pride, or, more specifically, with you have set up a Twitter account and are dissatisfied a particular form of pride known as solipsism. The with the size of your ‘following’, ask yourself when you dictionary defines this as “extreme preoccupation with last tweeted. Will anyone know you are there? and indulgence of one’s feelings, desires, etc.; egoistic The opposite of lurking is over-tweeting. Stretching self-absorption”, and it is unfortunate that self-absorbed a point, it is possible to link this to the deadly sin of egoists are very common on Twitter. There are, after all, Greed: taking up more than your share of the Twitter over half a billion registered Twitter users, and each one time-line. Twitter was launched in July 2006, so at the is a potential audience for the solipsist. time of writing (October 2013) it has been going for These annoying people come in several types. Some of them tweet every aspect of their lives, however trivial (see ‘Greed’, below). Others boast repeatedly of their smallest achievements, and still others appear not to #Pride believe that anyone, much less anyone sensible, could ever disagree with them. This may be particularly prevalent in #Wrath politics, but it can be even worse with sport and music fans. I ignore anyone whose tweets give the impression #Sloth that there is only one football team, band or composer worth following. Or, of course, that there is only one sub- #Greed branch of biochemistry (or any other discipline) worth specializing in. #Envy This brings me to Wrath. Twitter is, of course, a prime medium for pithy and relevant insults. Several #Gluttony people have speculated about how much fun Oscar #Lust 52 December 2013 © Biochemical Society Cyberbiochemist Regulars less than 90 months. Almost everyone who has amassed character summary that appears on each user’s page) that more than say 90 000 tweets is likely to be guilty of over- includes the words “Follow Me!” will hardly attract many tweeting. Put simply, absolutely no-one can have that followers. Similarly, boasting that you have just reached much interesting to say. Twitter-haters, of which there a significant number of followers – from 100 to 1 000 are many, will commonly express their objection as “I 000 – or that you are just about to (and suggesting that don’t want to know what Stephen Fry has for breakfast”. people sign up to help you get there) will probably just It is most unlikely that Stephen Fry reads The Biochemist raise yawns. , and most people’s breakfasts are even less interesting And this brings me to the final two sins: Gluttony than Stephen Fry’s. So so-called ‘life-streaming’ is out: and Lust. It is clearly possible to relate these to Twitter, and even if your aim is to explain step-by-step how to but far be it from your Cyberbiochemist editor to suggest use an intricate piece of lab equipment, there are far that any of its readers might have anything to do with diet more appropriate media available. scams or online porn. She would probably lose her job. Downloaded from http://portlandpress.com/biochemist/article-pdf/35/6/52/5393/bio035060052.pdf by guest on 30 September 2021 It is very easy to be Envious as a Twitter user. No And anyway, this is enough negativity. You might ask matter how many followers you have, you are bound to what defines a non-celebrated Twitter user who everyone know plenty of people who have more, and who must wants to follow. Medieval Catholics recognized four therefore be more influential. Feeling like this is not a cardinal virtues as well as seven deadly sins – prudence, Twitter sin. What is a sin, or at least is very annoying, justice, temperance and courage – and there might even is showing that you do. A Twitter profile (that’s the 160 be scope for another Cyberbiochemist here. ■ Best of the Web What’s that? Mark Burgess (Executive Editor) iSpot (http://www.ispotnature.org/) is a website that helps anyone identify anything in Nature. You can post an observation (it doesn’t have to be rare) and suggest an identification yourself or see if anyone else can identify it for you. Identifications are of varying degrees of certainty from ‘It might be this’ to ‘It’s likely to be this, but I can’t be certain’ to ‘I’m as sure as I can be’. You can help others by adding an identification to an existing observation and as others agree with your identifications, your reputation will grow and you get little badges next to your name to show your proficiency. For instance, I have made 157 observations and 189 identifications; 408 people have agreed with my identifications and I have agreed with 735 identifications by others. Everyone is helpful and well-behaved; there is no ‘flaming’, after all, everyone has to start somewhere. The site is particularly useful when on holiday and you do not know what to expect. Many plants look like those at home except the leaves are not quite right or some other niggle. iSpot is not just for identifications; there is a good news section and various forums where you can discuss specific groups or localities. There are online and mobile keys (good ones for lichen, trees and earthworms) and a quiz (fierce even at the ‘Easy’ level). iSpot was developed by The Open University with money from the Big Lottery Fund. It is now funded by the Garfield Weston Foundation, the British Ecological Society and is part of The OpenScience Laboratory, an initiative of The Open From top: great black-backed gull, juvenile lesser black- University and The Wolfson Foundation. ■ backed gull and yellow-legged gull December 2013 © Biochemical Society 53.