I find !GNUsocial successful because it works for me. Having tech-oriented conversations actually makes GNUsocial more successful for me than # -- compare the hashtag # on the two services and see the difference. And there are plenty of non-tech topics on other GNUsocial instances, see http://rainbowdash.net/ for example. Also, I don't see GNUsocial being any more complicated to use than Twitter. Using the WebUI on GNUsocial insulates the average user from the technical specifications of # True, people running their own instance need a bit more technical know-how. But at the GNUsocial demo at the # conference yesterday someone said that the Federation and scalability was nice, but she was *really* impressed that a full microblogging site could be set up in half an hour. GNUsocial is different from Twitter, and so its success is measured differently too.