Let's quickly review the 3 golden rules of software development :

• Rule #1 of software development : You never perform a featurectomy unless your users and/or clients ask for it. Especially when it's a feature intrinsic to user behaviour and interactivity with the product.
• Rule #2 of software development : Coders cannot forsee all uses for their products. Users usually discover what the product eventually can do for them through use or misuse or unforeseen uses.
• Rule #3 of software development : Break rules #1 and #2 and prepare yourself for a backlash of epic proportions

The people at Twitter have broken these golden rules in the matter of just a few hours and there's a deluge of complaints under the hashtag #fixreplies. A reaction that I am certain the people over at Twitter had no idea they would get what with the update posted by one of the founders (Biz Stone : @biz) on the company blog.

So let's take a moment to break down the train wreck created by the gentlemen (all the coders in the company are guys) of Twitter:

Twitter Blog: Small Settings Update

"Small settings update"? You have got to be a software developer to write a headline like that.

Most software developers make terrible user interface designers because to them software (and by extension the internet) is all about code. Software developers rarely think about the people who are going to use their product because 99% of the time they set out to create a product that only they themselves want to use. Coding to them is to satisfy an itch and not necessarily to serve or give wonderful experiences to others.

It's no wonder most people consider coders to be social misfits. When you have people who think tech (and the web) is all about the code and not the people, it's hard to look at them as "people persons".

And it's highly ironic that social media is so "code dependent"; especially if their code is proprietary. Especially with products like Twitter which is, in many ways, like one big cocktail party.

The thing is that back in the day Biz was "the guy" to go to for web design and development inspiration --to the point that Google hired him to clean up the Blogger/Blogspot mess they had bought from Pyra (which happened to be co-founded by another Twitter co-founder Evan Williams).

Of all people, Biz should have known that taking away a feature from users is never a "small thing". Especially if you have no real explanation other than "I thought it was a good idea".

We've updated the Notices section of Settings to better reflect how folks are using Twitter regarding replies. Based on usage patterns and feedback, we've learned most people want to see when someone they follow replies to another person they follow --it's a good way to stay in the loop.

I can't even wrap my head around this one. Twitter never based anything on any analysis. Twitter has been doing fine with the way they've dealt with replies SINCE THE CREATION OF THE SERVICE because that's how the system was coded!

Not only that: they coded it like that and people found it useful. To be able to see people on your stream replying to people who you do not follow is what gives Twitter the "Cocktail Party Effect". Actually, that is the #1 difference between Twitter and Facebook : one was a cocktail party, the other one more of a highfalutin college graduation book.

"The Cocktail Party Effect" of Twitter is what makes it a social networking tool : by seeing and tracking on your stream who replies to whom you sometimes find trends but most of the time you find interesting people. It's like walking around a room full of people and hearing snippets of conversations --some between two people you know, other times between some you don't know-- until you find something useful or somebody interesting enough to grab your attention.

That is why people set out to get followed by the thousands. It's not just about the broadcasting of your awesomeness. Getting thousands of followers ups your chances to discovering someone really awesome with something really amazing to share.

However, receiving one-sided fragments via replies sent to folks you don't follow in your timeline is undesirable. Today's update removes this undesirable and confusing option.

This is so wrong on so many levels I can't even begin to describe it. It really, absolutely makes me mad that they can be so clueless as to how their own service works --and that they didn't even come to people like me to get the feedback they needed.

Let me further explain what I mean by the "Cocktail Party Effect" : Let's say I follow Baratunde and Baratunde follows me. Now, imagine he is friends with Alec and Alec just joined the service. Now, Baratunde tells Alec of my awesomeness and so Alec decides to follow me. Yet Baratunde gets distracted and forgets to introduce us, so even though Alec is following me, I don't follow Alec.

How am I going to find out about Alec and Baratunde's relationship and rapport if I can't see Baratunde's replies to Alec? How am I going to get interested in this other person who is nevertheless part of my audience? Am I going to have to wait for Alec to reply to one of my tweets? What if Alec is shy and it hasn't occurred to him to ask Baratunde to introduce us?

This is why third party replies are so important. Their value is not in the information inherent in the reply. Their value is in the patterns of social activity you can find through the replying system.

In my case, there's a simple reason why I don't immediately add to my stream people who follow me: For every 10 new followers I get, about 4 are spammers. The other reason I don't "auto-follow" is to control the stream of information and not get overwhelmed. Yet the most important reason is that I want to know there's a really interesting person at the other end that's worth my time. And that means that if they haven't tweeted back at anything I've posted yet they have intense or interesting conversations with other people in my stream, then I'll definitely add them to mine.

Discovery Still Possible
Spotting new folks in tweets is an interesting way to check out new profiles and find new people to follow. Despite this update, you'll still see mentions or references linking to people you don't follow. For example, you'll continue to see, "Ev meeting with @biz about work stuff" even if you don't follow @biz. We'll be introducing better ways to discover and follow interesting accounts as we release more features in this space.

A reply is a reply is a reply. A reply is part of a conversation and vital for defining social interaction online. It is the height of arrogance to say "we'll take away the #1 feature you have for discovering new people but here's the consolation prize".

What the hell!

This makes absolutely no sense! Repeat after me: A reply is a reply is a reply. By any other name a reply is and always be part of an exchange between two people. Think about what you see when seeing two people engaged in conversation: You look at body language, ways in which they move their hands or look at each other or how they smile, smirk or sneer. You look at volume or the cadence of speech. When observing two people in a conversation the last thing you do is to "listen in". Following a conversation is not the same as listening in. That's the importance of the "Cocktail Party Effect" and the importance of Twitter as a social networking tool.

So why would @Ev, @Biz and crew do something so ridiculous as a featurectomy?

The only thing I can think of is of trying to consolidate as much activity on their site so they can raise pageviews and thus monetize "eyeballs" with advertising.

Because, honestly, it doesn't make any sense.

Spammers may have a pattern of 3rd party replies but most of the time they are replying directly to people (aka: me) with links or garbage as if they had been engage in conversation up until the "spweet". Or even worse, they will write posts that look as if I had retweeted their spam.

Here's a tip next time for @Ev and @Biz : Contact people like me for any future feature revisions. I have by this posting almost 6,000 followers and I follow well over 2,000 people in my stream. Most importanty, I tweet A LOT. I have over 18,000 updates.

That doesn't make me big but it is a sign that I am in the "demographic" of power user. I am more likely to be spammed or overwhelmed with unwanted whatever. I may also be more likely than most people to see the need for a feature given the frequency and volume of my tweeting.

This is one of the biggest blunders of Twitter. Ironic that at the O'Reilly Media SocialWeb FooCamp people (including myself) were raging about how Twitter was user-oriented when compared to Facebook's dictatorial and inflexible design changes.

Twitter needs to continue thinking light and flexible. Don't impose a change, especially by way of a featurectomy. Offer the change as an added feature that people can tweak in their setting. Make it so that people choose to not have to see 3rd party replies as opposed to imposing it's complete banishment as a feature.

Most importantly, Twitter should not make the mistake of wanting to be Facebook --because that is the #1 reason people like me would rather put up with the FAIL WHALE instead of with the whims of the "chief re-desing troll" and CEO of Facebook.

So Twitter, listen up : You are not Facebook and that's a good thing.