I respectfully, yet wholeheartedly, disagree with you. I think the beauty of Twitter is it keeps the conversation live in a short, not too intrusive manner. If you don't want to have other folks crowded out in your stream, unfollow the people who talk too much. I happen to think DFH is doing beer a great service by being so active on Twitter. They're one of the few breweries that aren't solely pushing their products or events (Rogue, I'm looking at you). Flying Dog is another great example of a brewery that has taken to Twitter and used it well.

You, Jim, are what they call an accomplice, a fellow traveler...perhaps even a co-conspirator.

Not pushing their products?!?!? I am scarred by the amount of information I was exposed to about their mixed IPA packaging. I was intruded upon. It felt yikky. Flying Dog is doing a better job. Can't fault them.

But I am happy to have a candidate in Rogue for the next show trial. I will alert the secret police.

I made and executed a similar sentence on another alcohol related Twitter account without making it public, though. There are limits to how much can be tolerated and those limits are obviously individual with individual Twitter users. However, when one feed starts to dominate the other 91 I follow by posting several times an hour, I think my limit of tolerance has been reached and overstepped.

I enjoy following Dogfish Head too. Not really sure why you needed to complain about this since there is an unfollow option.

With that outlook you, Larko, might qualify for a long black leather coat and riding whip for services to the collective.

Perhaps I am an accomplice. When I get going, I can post several times an hour. It's called conversation. That's the whole point of Twitter. If people didn't do that, Twitter would serve no purpose. If people didn't want their conversations public, they wouldn't use Twitter.

A lot of people are really excited about the DFH IPA 12 pack. It's a pretty cool product. I can't wait to get my hands on it, assuming it doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

I understand there are personal preferences to how much information someone wants to see from their followers. I'm more on Alan's end of the spectrum where I want to just know about the interesting bits and don't want to wade through a conversation that I'm not a part of--and likely don't care about--to get to those bits.

Taking DFH as an example, I'd like to see less conversation on the Twitter feed and move the conversation to Facebook where I have the choice on viewing it or not.

Conversation is not the point of Twitter. That is email. Twitter is the flow of observations that make a collective expression of the zeitgeist.

I should be able to give out the lash for misappropriation of one medium's purpose by another.

Thank you. This is fantastic.

I quite like the serendipitous nature of reading Twitter posts, and a man needs some tedious in his life!