Can you really have too much of a good thing? Someone disagreed with me once and said that in life, there is no such thing as having too much of a good thing.

    Can you really have too much of a good thing? Someone disagreed with me once and said that in life, there is no such thing as having too much of a good thing.

    Hogwash. (That's the first time in my life I've used the term "hogwash." I feel slightly off-kilter as a result, and I'm not sure quite how to navigate the rest of my life from this point on.)

    If you constantly have delicious ice cream in your freezer, how are you supposed to appreciate the sheer joy of devouring a delicious bowl of ice cream? Or, like me, violently stirring it into a liquidy soup and possessing the willpower to not enjoy even a single bite until it drips from your spoon like cereal milk? In our house, we have ice cream in the freezer only when it's served with cake on one of our birthdays. As a result, we really appreciate ice cream.

    If you could never have too much of a good thing, you can bet retailers would find a way to have Christmas more than once a year. Someone would encourage that birthdays be celebrated in monthly increments leading up to one's actual birthday. Hallmark would sell cards with “Happy One-Third Birthday to the Boy Who’s 2 2/3!”

    You get the point.

    It's why I'm a bit distraught over the experiment apparently underway at Twitter to double the amount of content users are allowed to include in a single tweet, from the current 140 character maximum, to 280.

    One of things that makes Twitter such a good thing is the fact that users have to sum up their thoughts in a paltry 140 characters. Doing so requires discipline. It requires attention to detail and sticking to the point and not getting all full of yourselves. It requires restraint.

    Made up of 14 letters, "Christopherson" is one of the longer last names you'll come across. So if you can imagine being able to type "Christopherson" 10 times in a single Twitter tweet, it actually seems like more than enough characters to make a point. But, funny thing, when you're trying to voice an opinion, react, or otherwise disseminate information in 140 characters or less, you get to your limit awfully quick.

    Twitter is a good thing mostly because it's not Facebook. Facebook requires no discipline, no restraint. When you're scrolling through your Facebook feed and you come across a friend's post and you see the dreaded hyperlink "more..." in mid-sentence at the end of the status update box, you can assume that your "friend" is a little too excited about something, or has been standing on their soapbox for a bit too long. Twitter's rules would cut that person off by their third sentence, and it's a beautiful thing.

    That's probably why you don't see a lot of cross-using between Facebook and Twitter. Certainly, there's the "proud parent" element on Twitter, too, but it's Facebook where you're going to see the frequent, limitless gushing about the amazing achievements of countless offspring, who make the honor roll, help cook mac and cheese one night, or...blow bubbles.

    Critics of social media and today's society in general as a result of the explosion of social media like to point to people being exposed only to people – and those peoples’ opinions, cultures and experiences – that they've liked, friended or followed. As a result, people are rarely exposed to viewpoints that differ from their own, so they're secluded in their protective bubble of like-minded people.

    But Twitter breaks the bubble barrier, at least to a degree. I don't follow President Trump on Twitter, but I see every single one of his tweets because they're re-tweeted by various people, organizations and media outlets that I do follow, and, of course, the lengthy communication threads inspired by those retweets are priceless entertainment, frequently clever as heck, and, on occasion, nothing short of insightful and bursting with logic.

    This is all accomplished within the confines of 140 characters. Twitter users have a bevy of acronyms and abbreviations at their disposal to state their case within the character limit, and if they're simply unable to contain themselves, they've created a loophole in which they put a "1/" in a tweet, which is a signal to everyone reading that another tweet is to follow. And if in that second tweet you see a "2/" you know a third one is coming and, well, at that point the person might as well be posting on Facebook.

    A 140-character maximum is plenty of a good thing. It’s eating ice cream at wide enough intervals so that you’re still giddy while eating it, and you don’t get fat. Eating double the amount of ice cream or doubling the length of your tweets accomplishes nothing more than inviting bloat and blather. If anything, the Twitter brass should experiment with the opposite, and cut the character maximum in half, to 70. The previous sentence alone goes well over the limit.

    Oh, yes, that would be a good thing.