I think what has kept Twitter so vibrant for me - despite my skepticism post-SXSW hubbub about the applications, is that it lets me check things where I want to. So while others enjoy being IMed and SMSed and getting twitters real-time, I've got more of the "let's read the next 140 character fortune cookie from Scoble, Brian Johnson, etc." Claude Lauer, you might want to tone it down a bit. :)
It's like checking email candy.... or as someone put it before, microblogging. It's crappy if it were taken over by spammers, but, since you choose to add people you see...we are just one happy network.
Still I am amazed I check it now all the time. It's my new TV.
And ya, I heard about the Digg.com debacle. Some law opinion from ZDnet took an interesting viewpoint.
I think what gets me about the whole affair is how ultimately spiteful it is for a community to overwhelm the folks gracious enough to host them. Regardless of what you think about the hack code posted, the fact that the users swarmed over the Digg site like vandals with cans of spray paint bothers me. And in some karmic way too it bothers me that there was nothing altruistic about the swarm. No one who posted the code was asking say, for better health care, or alms for the poor, or stop the violence in our neighborhoods. It was swarmed on behalf of consumerism - hey, free stuff! Use this hammer to break the store window! Take this and get free stuff!
Reminded me of a "riot" I heard about while I was in college where really the "protest" ended up in hundreds of students breaking into stores and running off with designer jeans and TVs. The power of online community is huge, just like the power of offline community is huge. Do we really want to spend our super community powers on stuff that, has indeed an impact on the world but doesn't actually make it that much of a better place?