When RT isn't RT

As someone who's always tweeting and re-tweeting, I notice occasional voices complaining about the misuse of RT - the re-tweet that really just means repeating a message.

Twitter UserA tweets, "Today is lovely." UserB reads this and feels the same way or just likes the sentiment and re-tweets it, so it goes out as "RT @UserA today is lovely." UserC keeps it going as is or as a double re-tweet: "RT @UserB RT @UserA today is lovely."

RT is better than "Chinese whispers" since you don't lose the original wording, no matter how many times a message is bounced along. Messages are passed on efficiently and with respect. 

Unfortunately, the original intention of RT is often misused, even if it's inadvertent. In replying to UserA's message, you should "mention" him by beginning your tweet with "@UserA", as in "@UserA agreed!"

UserC, who follows both UserA and UserB, sees both tweets and understands instantly what UserA tweeted and what UserB is talking about.

But too many people add their comments directly to the original tweet, which confuses followers. UserC is going to misunderstand if he reads "RT @UserA today is lovely. Agreed!" Who sent the original tweet?

This misuse becomes problematic sometimes. The person whose tweets are misused could be blamed. The person who misused it might not remember what he did wrong.

It's understandable that sometimes we want everyone who follows us to know what and whom we're replying to. One way to reply to a tweet is to use "Re" instead of "RT" to help others understand that this either includes our own reply message or is just an RT.

Sometime our tweets spread all over the Internet and we just can't control them. To tweet effectively from the start is the best prevention and one way of guaranteeing effective communication.