Lucky me, I've been invited to join the Twitter Retweet Beta Group. This little Twitter.com feature places the ability to retweet (essentially, repost) any tweet right inside Twitter's Web-based interface. Up until now, you had to use a third-party tool, such as TweetDeck, for one-click retweets.

I'm perfectly happy with my Twitter experience inside TweetDeck. It lets me retweet with ease, and it adds search watch lists, easy image uploads, instant URL shortening, and more. Twitter's execs are obviously working to get people out of these third-party tools and back onto the parent site by providing many of the features once only found elsewhere. That's fine. I don't think people will walk away en masse from TweetDeck, Seesmic, UberTwitter, etc. simply because the rather two-dimensional Twitter.com has a couple of new features. That said, with the introduction of Retweet, Twitter is showing a frightening dictatorial inclination.

Twitter's Retweet tool is, like most other Twitter functions, pretty subtle; a new retweet icon and the word Retweet appears next to Reply in all Tweets. If you select Retweet, a box pops up and asks you if you want to "Retweet to Your Followers." That phrase confused me a bit. I know that all Tweets appear in the Twitter Homepage feed and that all of your followers will see your new Tweet on their own homepage. So why is Twitter restating the obvious? It makes it sound as if it plans on hiding the Retweet from the Twitter homepage. Considering what comes next, I think that's exactly what they're doing.

I found a Tweet I liked enough to retweet, so I selected the Retweet icon. Then I hit okay on the odd message and after that my...tweet...was…gone. By gone, I mean posted. I never had a chance to edit, alter, add my own two cents, include additional hashtags, or anything. The new Twitter function simply shepherds the tweet right back into the mix.

I was so stunned that I immediately sent out this tweet:

"Twitter Retweet is an odd tool. Asks if you want to "Retweet to Your Followers" (which means?) + then doesn't give you a chance to edit it".

Part of the reason I've amassed over 12,000 followers is because I don't simply parrot what I find in Twitter. I try to provide context to the information. I tell people what I think about what I've found, how I see things differently, or if I have interesting or entertaining information to add. I always preface these with "Me:" so my followers know it's me talking. I've received numerous messages from followers who say they appreciate this approach.

Honestly, I felt like I found a bug with Retweet. But then Kevin Tofel of jkontherun.com told me on Twitter: "the folks at Twitter spoke about RT earlier this month in our office. Said RT should be a direct quote, hence no editing."

Seriously? Are these guys not even aware of how their own service works? I'm not the only one who adds to RTs. It's an incredibly common practice, and I think it's what helps propel the never-ending Twitter conversation along. Without this, Twitter is a relatively small number of useful original Tweets and then an endless series of duplicate Retweets. Now I understand why Twitter might want to post these RTs only to your followers. If it doesn't, duplicate Tweets show up in the main Twitter feed, turning the homepage into a bland sea of repetition. Tofel told me there's a concern about the context of a RT being changed. That is possible, but the Twitter community has been pretty sharp about self-policing. And, why shouldn't it be? If you RT and completely alter someone's post, it's dead simple to find the original post in someone's Twitter feed. No one wants to be called out for completely altering someone else's words and meaning.

It took me some time to come around to Twitter, but anyone who knows me understands that I now have a deep and abiding love (dare I say obsession?) with the service. One of the side benefits has been imagining that the Twitter leaders, Biz Stone and Evan Williams, are pretty cool guys who not only get the Internet but understand better than most how people communicate. The truth seems somewhat contradictory. How could they be so dictatorial? How can they so fundamentally misunderstand their own service?

You know what? I refuse to believe it. This random idea must've come from a mid-level functionary who thought he or she was doing the right thing for Twitter.

Either way, I want this to change. I know that many people, like me, will continue using third-party tools and retweet and edit at will, but this is the first step down a particularly dark road for Twitter. Who's to say that the company won't alter the Twitter API, so that it prevents edited retweets from publishing? It could do that.

Within minutes of my first negative Twitter Retweet post, fellow Tweeters starting lining up behind me in support. MSR_PR tweeted, "but we love to give our takes on the tweets we retweet. Editing is muy importante!" PeteYoungminKim added, "I was just thinking the same thing. I usually like to add a separate note as to why I'm Retweeting." I can't imagine we're the only ones. My suggestion to all of you fellow Tweeters is to say thanks but no thanks to Twitter's new Retweeting feature until @biz and @ev decide to add the ability to edit.

The Retweet beta group invite promised that I might "start seeing retweets in a new way."No kidding.

Get on Lance Ulanoff's RSS Feed.

Follow me on Twitter! http://twitter.com/LanceUlanoff

More Lance Ulanoff:
•   Will HP Ever Make a Comeback?
•   Ebook Pricing War Wages On
•   Microsoft Screws Up Windows 8
•   Stalking by Any Other Name is Still Stalking
•   Cybersecurity and False Hope
•  more

Full Windows 7 Coverage