"I don't get Twitter." It's a phrase I've been hearing a lot lately. Maybe it's because of my increased activity on Twitter, or perhaps it has more to do with the fact that everyone's been so 'atwitter' about it.  

In either case, I'm talking about Twitter. A lot. I'm talking to those that can't get enough, those that have Twitter yet don't use it very often, and to a lot of non-believers.  I think there's a pretty good concensus among everyone that nobody's quite figured out what Twitter is yet, and that has a lot to do with the fact that Twitter can be a lot of things to a lot of different people.

The one thing Twitter is not is "just Facebook status messages", as some I've run into have oft stated.  So, for those interested in learning more about what Twitter is to me and to some of those around me and in the media, and perhaps for those a little intimidated, confused, or perhaps even scared by the concept, Twitter:

• Twitter is a way for media personalities and politicians to interact in new and exciting ways, often without a filter.
• Twitter is a way for Michael Ian Black to make us laugh.
• Twitter is how Rainn Wilson pointed out one of the most interesting pieces of art I've seen in a long time.
• Twitter can help you get a job.
• Lance Armstrong used Twitter to seek help finding his stolen bike.
• Twitter can let fans get a peak into the lives of athletes. 
• Twitter can let you know when DailyKos or OpenLeft or any of your other favorite blogs (and newspapers) post something new.
• Twitter helps you connect with old friends (and sometimes old fads).
• Twitter helps you take the temperature of a community, for example the progressive community or the conservative community.
• Twitter lets me know when Drupal modules come out and when they're updated.
• Twitter can tell you the weather. Or the score.
• Twitter can help with voting.
• Twitter gives stock tips.
• You might even tweet at the person sitting right next to you.
• At some point along the way, you'll even get sick of hearing about all the things you can do with Twitter.

Twitter is all of these things and more.  Twitter is even not for everyone (although if it's not for you Twitter's CEO might not think highly of you).  

In any case, it's certainly not "just Facebook status messages".

 I've been thinking a lot lately about the EFCA, as Congress prepares to debate and news stories fly that labor may be willing to make a concession on the highest profile of the issues contained in EFCA, which is Card Check.  

For those who don't know, Card Check means that if 50% of employees check a card saying they want a union, the business must recognize that and negotiate with them in good faith.  Right now they can organize a union that way, but often companies refuse to recognize the union, which is currently legal.

The current system for organizing a union in a binding manner is what they refer to as the "secret ballot". Miss Laura at DailyKos has a good diary today outlining the reasons "secret ballot" makes it harder for employees who want a union to get it.

So this framing of preserving the "secret ballot" is the main roadblock keeping some on the fence about EFCA.  Some news stories are reporting labor organizations may conceed card check altogether in exchange for some of the other EFCA provisions that will help protect them.

So why don't we find a compromise that preserves the "secret ballot" -- The organizing principle behind EFCA opposition -- while preventing the scare tactics and intimidation that often comes along with it.

What if we changed the law to say that if 50% of employees check a card, they're entitled to a secret ballot election -- but a secret ballot election that must be held within a very strict amount of time, perhaps 24 hours.  Furthermore, what if we said that if the business didn't agree to hold a secret ballot within the alloted amount of time, then the card check would be sufficient to create the union.  And we say that the terms of the election, where it's held, what time, etc. must be agreed upon by the employer AND a representative of the employees.

Then we would have a framework to take away the biggest anti-EFCA talking point -- that it takes away the right to a Democratic secret election -- while keeping intact the intent of card check, which is to limit the employers ability to crack down on organizers.

Please, I would love to hear your thoughts on this.  Many of you will know more about EFCA and labor law than I.  Is something like this a possible way forward?  What are the arguments against it?  Could something like that pick up labor support as an acceptable compromise?