Robb Farrago posted an interesting look at why on Twitter both #KWawesome and #WRawesome are used as local hashtags. He even conducted a survey. It has already sparked a lively discussion. My comment was quite long and I wanted to make sure my readers saw it and so here it is.

I believe that I started #WRawesome. Essentially, I saw folks using #KWawesome as being synonymous with Waterloo Region. Doing so is insensitive to folks in Waterloo Region but not in Kitchener or Waterloo–especially Cambridge but also when used for things like the Elmira Maple Syrup Festival or the Wellesley Apple Butter & Cheese Festival. For me, using #WRawesome is about being respectful and inclusive. Unless you are being specific about Kitchener and/or Waterloo.

I could go into much more detail but you’ll need to wait until I get to writing a post on my to do list called “My Waterloo Region includes Cambridge.”

I agree with Amanda that either are too long. I tend to use them only when something is “awesome.” I normally use #Kitchener or #cbridge for what applies to just one of them. I haven’t seen anything specific to the city of Waterloo or I’d use that too. Maybe #wloo ?

For the entire Region, I use #WR or #WaterlooRegion depending on space. I use #RoW for regional government.

I also like using #WRarts, #WRtech, etc for topic specific tweets. I think I saw someone using #WRnews or #WRpoli which seemed like a good idea to me though I never got in the habit of using it.

Thanks for sparking this discussion Robb! I think that I’ll continue it by posting these comments on my own blog but I’ll stay plugged in here too.

Another point just came to me. Robb’s survey was KW heavy. It’d be interesting to know what the results were for people who lived outside those two cities.

Note: When I have more time, I’ll come back and make each of these hashtags searchable from this post.

3 thoughts on “My perspective on local hashtags: #WRawesome, #KWawesome, #Kitchener, #WRarts, #WRtech and more!

  1. Thanks for commenting and linking to my post, I am glad you enjoyed it. It is true that the majority of respondents were based in KW (83%). I’d certainly like to receive more responses from those in the while region and see if it changes some of the results.

  2. While I do think we need to be doing more to be inclusive of Cambridge, how much of it is their own doing? My sense is that far too many people in Cambridge would rather not think of themselves as being part of the region. The notion is kind of burning in my mind after seeing absolutely no participation from Cambridge staff or citizens in the CTC Community Building Strategy stakeholder sessions in the last three days (despite much discussion on meeting the transportation needs for large parts of Cambridge). Have they been pushed by us to the point of “why bother?” or has their own lack of engagement the reason for their invisibility to the other two cities?

    1. I’ll likely touch on some of that when I get around to writing the post that I mentioned Mike. Your observation about this week is disappointing. I suspect though that it is due, at least in part, to the fact that the first phase of the LRT doesn’t include Cambidge–even if as you suggest their needs are being considered as part of the CTC process.

      Another possibility for lack of citizen involvement is that the stakeholder sessions were by invitation only. Were citizens from Cambridge invited? I’d hope so. If some were but they didn’t come, I’d suggest for the next two sets that the organizers keep at it until they are sure some are coming.

Leave a Reply