The heart of tech is coming to the heart of the Mediterranean. Join TNW in València this March 🇪🇸

This article was published on August 11, 2012

Here’s why you should back with two days left (and why you shouldn’t)

Here’s why you should back with two days left (and why you shouldn’t)
Martin SFP Bryant
Story by

Martin SFP Bryant


Martin Bryant is founder of Big Revolution, where he helps tech companies refine their proposition and positioning, and develops high-qualit Martin Bryant is founder of Big Revolution, where he helps tech companies refine their proposition and positioning, and develops high-quality, compelling content for them. He previously served in several roles at TNW, including Editor-in-Chief. He left the company in April 2016 for pastures new.

After a few weeks of pondering the merits of, three days ago I finally decided to bite the bullet, back the crowdfunding campaign and jump into the alpha version of the service, which is already open and in use by an army of keen users.

Given the summer news lull, it’s not surprising that Dalton Caldwell’s drive to win public backing for his ‘Anti-Twitter’ has got as much press as it has. I mean, this is the third post we’ve published about it in 24 hours! In my defence though, I wrote most of this yesterday before the other two posts went out, so don’t judge me for joining the media scrum.

With two days to go, crowdfunding sits at the time of writing at $396,200 – still somewhat short of the $500,000 Caldwell has set as the tipping point to guarantee the project goes ahead. It could still make it, but barring the chance of a last-minute intervention from a big backer, there’s still a chance that the project will collapse in less than 48 hours from now.

Why to back

So, if you’ve been considering it, or you’ve just let the whole thing pass you by thus far, why might you want to do the same as me and back with a pledge of at least $50 at this late stage?

To join a fledgling community largely disillusioned by Twitter:

I’ll admit, I’m far from disillusioned by Twitter and I’m still a happy user. There are some serious questions hanging over its future relationship with its current community of third-party developers though, meaning that Twitter in a year from now may be very different to what it is now – so it’s interesting to see what else is on offer.

It turns out that the current userbase is largely made up of developers looking for new toys to play with and geeks who feel Twitter has lost something of what excited them. Here are some example answers I received when I asked’s current users what the appeal was (update: link to the full thread):

It’s easy to dismiss the optimism around as being blind to its flaws (see below) but if you miss the early days of Twitter or just like watching new online communities emerge, is a good place to be. Many of these people were early Twitter users, and they’re keen to reboot the microblogging concept and send it in a different direction that learns from the perceived mistakes Twitter has made

To reserve your username:

If really does become a viable rival to Twitter, at least in tech circles, you’ll want a good username, right? currently offers the ability to claim your Twitter username for the service, or another if you prefer. Although I joined too late to grab @martin, I did get @martinbryant, something I didn’t event try to get when I joined Twitter as @MartinSFP to promote the music I was making at the time. By the time I considered changing to my real name, it was too late. Not this time!

Obviously, committing $50 to reserve a username is some form of insanity, but if you’re an early adopter, these things can be important. Getting in now is a good way of making sure you’re covered.

To develop the first wave of apps:

Over 1,300 people have signed up for developer tier access at $100. As we reported yesterday, developers are already building iOS and Web clients for using its fledgling API. If you like being a pioneer at sculpting a new service into new shapes, it could well be worth joining.

On the other hand, why NOT to back

Of course, there are strong reasons to take a ‘wait and see’ approach when it comes to, and it’s not just down to not wanting to commit money to a project that might not take off.

By charging an entry fee, will never be exactly what Twitter could have become if it had opted to focus on being a platform company over a media and advertising company. Much of the joy of Twitter comes from the fact that you can talk to anyone you like, and anyone can join in seconds.

‘Twitter with a paywall’ simply can’t have that same mass appeal. As useful as many ‘non-tech’ people find Twitter, it’s just a nice addition to their lives, not important enough to pay for. If they don’t pay to use, they won’t be interested in buying apps for it either. That has serious implications on the economic prospects for the developer community is trying to encourage. Sure, there might be the potential for some successful apps, but economically, the ‘anti-Twitter’ seems to make a lot more sense for Dalton Caldwell than it does for its developer community.

Caldwell has suggested a revenue share model, where a proportion of subscription fees received by are distributed to third-party developers, but he admits it would be complicated to administer and it remains to be seen if it can work in a way that will be satisfactory to all parties concerned.

Still, despite its flaws, there’s a chance that could become something worth paying for, and it’s an interesting experiment to watch unfold. That’s why I backed it and why you might want to do the same this weekend.

Image credit: Sushi Ina