The author of this very thoughtful article makes a lot of valid points when it comes to the dynamics of social media groups as they fluctuate in size, but he loses me at the end when he insinuates that there is a “right” or “wrong” way to use new media channels such as Twitter.

The uninitiated will often explain their lack of participation in social media away by claiming that they simply “don’t get it,” which I always counter with my belief that there really is nothing to “get.” This is not to say that Twitter is without value. Far from it. What I am trying to say is that the non-existent barrier of entry that comes from an ecosystem with little or no hard-and-fast rules of engagement is what makes social media so versatile. And it is this versatility that makes it so valuable.

Over the last year or so, almost every magazine or blog has released some sort of “Guide to Twitter” that advises users of the service to follow a certain set of rules when choosing who to follow, how often to post, or what is appropriate to share with your audience.  Even though I tend to agree with the more reasonable suggestions these pieces make, I ultimately think they should all be thrown in a backyard tire fire and replaced with one simple creedo: Do whatever you want.

Talk about current events. Talk about your bowel movements.  Build your brand. Workshop dick jokes. Participate in trending topics.  Refuse to even acknowledge the existence of hashtags.

Keep tabs on people whose output you enjoy whether or not they reciprocate the gesture.  Engage in conversational replies only when your interest is peaked.  Allow the size of your audience to have as much or as little effect on your activity as you wish.

The ability to follow, unfollow, or block other users with a single click is the only institutional intervention necessary to ensure a user get the exact experience he or she desires. And I would argue that this is the point of all this stuff, anyway.