General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI liked DU a lot more before it turned into a Twitter repeater. How about you?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hekate
(99,410 posts)
PufPuf23
(9,564 posts)and banned from General Discussion.
Never would have mentioned this but you asked the question.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)only to find out it's just a Twit re-post, which I will not read.
Bluesaph
(963 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)
empedocles
(15,751 posts)PufPuf23
(9,564 posts)Not a twitter member and do find much of interest on twitter as well as junk and confusion.
Have zero interest in joining and posting on twitter.
Often wish knew more about the twitter poster as a clue to how much weight to assign a tweet.
Responded to my own post to make clear not making a statement against twitter but that having a dedicated twitter forum would IMO improve DU.
bucolic_frolic
(52,399 posts)I mean it's not like money was ever a consideration for Republicans. When Twitter was $25 they probably could have had a real chance at winning. Maybe too much winning? Or money is more important than winning. 
AZ8theist
(6,896 posts)Everyone knows the answer to that. And with his tax returns, we may yet see PROOF he's a lying bag of horseshit.
bucolic_frolic
(52,399 posts)Jesse Helms, who launched a bid to takeover CBS and fire Dan Rather, was smarter than Drumpf!
Stable genius belongs in the barns shoveling horse manure
live love laugh
(15,890 posts)
All of it I hope ...
WonderGrunion
(2,995 posts)Most reporters and news organizations break news via Twitter now. You would have to have an exception for the Late Breaking News forum.
PufPuf23
(9,564 posts)made the follow up post clarifying that was not against twitter per se.
What I suggest is a twitter forum parallel and similar in function to Breaking News where the source is limited to tweets.
Yeehah
(5,927 posts)Everybody can be happy!
grantcart
(53,061 posts)
catrose
(5,305 posts)
JohnnyRingo
(20,160 posts)There are an abundance of humorous tweets.
PufPuf23
(9,564 posts)but overlooked the lounge as thinking of more serious topic twitter posts.
Thank you.
AwakeAtLast
(14,315 posts)Ask the Administrators!
AKwannabe
(6,819 posts)Sometimes ....
mahatmakanejeeves
(66,704 posts)that I'm posting at DU in between bouts of working. Sometimes all the time I have is to post a tweet and then run back to work.
It's a matter of how much time I have.
But, yes, I'm guilty as charged.
chia
(2,650 posts)
Greybnk48
(10,605 posts)Keep them coming.
ProfessorGAC
(74,436 posts)Given the possibility of paywalls at papers & magazines, these Twitter capsulized nuggets are useful to prompt discussion.
And that's what we're here for.
Boysterload
(8 posts)I wish I didn't have to click on a link in the post to view the Tweet on Twitter. I would much prefer the text of the tweet be in the post. Some of my fav saved links are tweets that were posted on DU.
mahatmakanejeeves
(66,704 posts)For people on slow connections, the texts load much more quickly than the tweets.
Biophilic
(6,068 posts)Please keep posting because I just can't do twitter myself.
Cha
(314,338 posts)can get more good information & can spread it more widely because of it.
Just bc some don't like them doesn't mean we stop bringing excellent tweets to DU.. like Marc Elias' election update for Instance & Stacey Abrams.
Link to tweet
Ooops.. the dreaded twitter
taxi
(2,493 posts)Creating a forum for tweets would ultimately lessen our exposure to events, and in doing so inadvertently cut the legs out from newer issues destined to be tomorrow's news.
A decision to expose DU members to the content of such tweets would require someone to monitor, research, and publish in an OP the content of the tweet. As it is now each individual member makes that decision.
A solution for those members unable to view tweets may be to a) indicate in the post title by some method that the post contains a tweet, eg, This is my post (t), or b) use the tools provided for trending, most recommended, and most discussed.
This is my post (t) for tweets
This is my post (v) ... videos
This is my post (l) ... links
on edit - maybe not for links, they're expected
FlyingPiggy
(3,747 posts)
msongs
(72,391 posts)chia
(2,650 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Cha
(314,338 posts)Do you think he likes NEWS like this..?
Link to tweet
OR.. would he Rather Get the Fox Screws Version?!!
Thanks Cha! 
Cha
(314,338 posts)twitter bug! 
sheshe2
(93,737 posts)I am learning. 
cilla4progress
(26,436 posts)am also a repeat offender!
I like the idea of a special forum for twitter re-posts?
taxi
(2,493 posts)Creating a forum for tweets would ultimately lessen our exposure to events, and in doing so inadvertently cut the legs out from newer issues destined to be tomorrow's news.
A decision to expose DU members to the content of such tweets would require someone to monitor, research, and publish in an OP the content of the tweet. As it is now each individual member makes that decision.
A solution for those members unable to view tweets may be to a) indicate in the post title by some method that the post contains a tweet, eg, This is my post (t), or b) use the tools provided for trending, most recommended, and most discussed.
This is my post (t) for tweets
This is my post (v) ... videos
This is my post (l) ... links
on edit - when the link is the only content
Sogo
(6,611 posts)nt.
Dagstead Bumwood
(6,122 posts)If I didn't see them here I likely wouldn't see them.
Demovictory9
(37,113 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)If I wanted to read twit posts and support a Fascist outlet, I'd be on Twit.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)Why not just go straight to the article and post that link directly to DU instead of driving traffic to Twitter? It would be a huge help to those who cannot access Twitter. The 'original' tweets are often unverified information so they are less than useful.
I would rather read the article and not have to click the twitter link to get to it
BComplex
(9,551 posts)But I really enjoy a lot of the tweets posted on DU. If DUers were mostly cross-posting bullshit posts, I would be opposed to it. But most DUers are doing it for informative or entertaining purposes. Most of the tweets shared or posted are germane to the forums discussions.
For instance...the Lincoln Project was mostly from twitter during the elections, and they were giving me hope.
hlthe2b
(111,298 posts)But, I agree with posting both the link to the original source AND excerpting from the original article whenever possible.
grumpyduck
(6,669 posts)mahatmakanejeeves
(66,704 posts)The reason I do that is that it is my way of giving attribution to the source for my post. Also, sometimes people have only enought time to read the tweet and not the entire article. They can bookmark the thread and come back to it later.
marble falls
(68,530 posts)JohnnyRingo
(20,160 posts)If it's worth reading the teaser, it's worth posting the whole thing.
bigtree
(92,513 posts)...bringing you even closer to the news we talk about, which is most often the ccase.
csziggy
(34,189 posts)For instance, a NY Times headline and link in a random party tweet, copied to DU. I find that frustrating - rather than being able to click directly to the NY Times article, I have to go to Twitter, then click. As I get older and more arthritic, it gets more and more annoying. I'd rather do something more useful with my hands.
Usually, I just skip looking at the article and back off that DU thread without comment.
Treefrog
(4,170 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)At worst, promoting a pro-Fascist platform, every bit as evil as Fascistbook.
brush
(61,033 posts)into a whole other source of information. I welcome the connections and the information they bring. It's where the world is right now. Why shut it off?
See the link below to understand how much information we would miss if not for twitter links. This is a video on the Q-idiot Marjorie Taylor Green.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215234077
sheshe2
(93,737 posts) 
bronxiteforever
(10,766 posts)
ret5hd
(21,791 posts)the Twitter formatting makes you view the EXACT SAME THING over and over and over..,so distracting and frustrating.
doubleplusgood
(976 posts)
TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)administration, there isn't much to complain about as things are moving along with boring competence. We did get used to the regular disemboweling of that other guy.
I've been meaning to ask, though-- howcum when posting a tweet, it gets repeated two or three time?
csziggy
(34,189 posts)The screen shot is so people who cannot access Twitter can see what was posted. Sometimes it is just the text copied, but those who have the technology post a screen shot especially if there are images.
murielm99
(32,338 posts)I have been informed that I don't understand twitter or know how to use it.
Poor li'l me.
RainCaster
(13,094 posts)This saves me time looking over a lot of useless posts. Very nice.
brush
(61,033 posts)See the link below to understand how much information we would miss if not for twitter links. This is a video on the Q-idiot Marjorie Taylor Green.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215234077
Treefrog
(4,170 posts)brush
(61,033 posts)Treefrog
(4,170 posts)brush
(61,033 posts)hlthe2b
(111,298 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 16, 2021, 04:03 PM - Edit history (1)
including constitutional lawyers like Laurence Tribe, Neal Katyal, Steve Vladek, Election law experts like Marc Elias, DOJ, FBI and National Security experts like Preet Bharara, Joyce Vance, Frank Fligliuzzi, Malcolm Vance, and many respected journalists. And on a lighter note, so many posts can be found from around the world reflecting the incredible array of wildlife and conservation efforts--and the often wacky animal behavior that accompanies.
So, no. I consider it a real benefit to hear in real-time from them, AS LONG as the posters likewise include the text of the tweet for those who can't see them embedded AND provide a bit of context.
I have more issues with the trend toward posting nothing more than a video with no context whatsoever. A lot of us can't watch videos--even on a break from work settings.
On edit, I SHOULD point out that I am not on Twitter myself. I DO bookmark some Twitter feeds for these and more individuals and find myself checking them out when something occurs about which they might comment and shed some light based on their own experience and expertise.
Creating a forum for tweets would ultimately lessen our exposure to events, and in doing so inadvertently cut the legs out from newer issues destined to be tomorrow's news.
A decision to expose DU members to the content of such tweets would require someone to monitor, research, and publish in an OP the content of the tweet. As it is now each individual member makes that decision.
A solution for those members unable to view tweets may be to a) indicate in the post title by some method that the post contains a tweet, eg, This is my post (t), or b) use the tools provided for trending, most recommended, and most discussed.
This is my post (t) for tweets
This is my post (v) ... videos
This is my post (l) ... links
on edit - when the link is the only content
malaise
(289,051 posts)I agree
Vinca
(52,683 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)
ShazzieB
(21,602 posts)If you don't like Twitter, just say so. Not everyone does. Different strokes and all that. Passive aggressive comments that are insulting to people who do like it are unnecessary and not cool.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)I don't think most people understand that, same as Fascistbook, if you use Twit you are supporting a platform that supports Fascism.
orleans
(36,410 posts)whenever i have googled a twitter link for a house member or a senator i have found it.
(although some have let their feed languish such as ted cruz and i suspect he's over on parlor which i will not venture off to)
so, i would say if there is a member of congress that doesn't have a twitter account i am not aware of them; the majority (if not all) do.
example:
Link to tweet
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)orleans
(36,410 posts)middle man of the press, or the hassle of soundbites
besides, not everyone can watch tv 24-7 (and we all don't get cnn or msnbc) but anyone can look on twitter
Irish_Dem
(74,784 posts)on what most people are saying.
I stopped getting newspapers early on in the internet era. I started reading all the news online. And my friends made fun of me. But now they read everything online too.
I was taught from an early age to be an independent thinker and get all sides of an issue.
I also like to hear what younger people are thinking. So I like Twitter. I am not good at navigating it, so I appreciate people posting things here.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,515 posts)
Lisa0825
(14,491 posts)I greatly appreciate the Twitter info.
Nevilledog
(54,540 posts)empedocles
(15,751 posts)brush
(61,033 posts)You supply so much content here that if you stop we'll be the worse for it. I myself am amazed and disappointed that there is an anti-information faction on progressive DU. Who would've thunk it?
Nevilledog
(54,540 posts)brush
(61,033 posts)orleans
(36,410 posts)and i don't wanna stop.
besides, du needs to know the latest tweet jeff tiedrich is twitting
(i love his tweets)
(such as this one:
Link to tweet
Nevilledog
(54,540 posts)Irish_Dem
(74,784 posts)And that means Twitter.
brush
(61,033 posts)marble falls
(68,530 posts)Cha
(314,338 posts)an OP that they don't like it. Ooh.
Cha
(314,338 posts)So there!
LizBeth
(11,216 posts)
Croney
(4,974 posts)If I had to vote I'd say leave things the way they are. I'd never visit a Twitter-only forum, I might as well join Twitter.
Solly Mack
(95,683 posts)Not all Twitter shares elevate or even encourage discussion but some do. Not all shares are worth the sharing. Some are the ones that are shared only because someone liked what was said (others will like it too is the premise and that premise is not without some merit), but then a message/discussion board has its fair share of that kind of thing - with or without Twitter.
Kind of like a smorgasbord. I take what I want and leave the rest.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)
sinkingfeeling
(56,337 posts)just a county or city name in news posts. Do you know how many Washington Counties there are?
Also, my ideal, would be a few sentences describing a video, so I don't have to watch it and then think it was a waste of my time.
demtenjeep
(31,997 posts)so I don't much care one way or another
demtenjeep
(31,997 posts)so I don't much care one way or another
awesomerwb1
(4,842 posts)What I think should not be allowed are the no context one liners like:
did you see that shot?
I can't believe he just said that!
Using DU like you're sending a text message to a friend shouldn't be allowed.
ShazzieB
(21,602 posts)Those things are annoying. Clicking on something that sounds interesting only to find a comment about how great something was with few clues to WHAT it even was is like walking into the middle of a conversation that you don't have any context for.
We are NOT all always watching the same TV shows at the same time. Even if we did watch the same show, we may not stumble on the post until hours later and not be able to tell what show the person was commenting on. Posts that say nothing but, "Wow, [person] is really on fire tonight!" are a waste of time to post and to read, afaic.
MuseRider
(34,949 posts)I have a twitter account that I use to see some of the twitter links that do not just show up or maybe they just don't if you don't do twitter? I have barely ever used it except for a couple of times but I do follow people and enjoy reading their feeds.
Info is info and it is all good to read. Why write out something and take the time to source it when you can post the tweet and get the info out?
WarGamer
(17,875 posts)Are usually incapable of forming their own cogent arguments.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)(I agree, but there are a lot of Twit fans here).
chia
(2,650 posts)That smacks of elitism - a way of shaming people into not sharing something they might've shared otherwise.
WarGamer
(17,875 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 16, 2021, 05:50 PM - Edit history (1)
And some people post an endless barrage of the intellectual product of others.
Frequently I will ask them... "Ok, xyz123... what do YOU think of that issue? I already know how Milton Friedman felt, tell me why YOU believe that is true."
And I frequently find the Twitter fans just parrot others.
I like to hear others express their thoughts. It tells you more about how they form opinions and informs you of their character and intellect.
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)WarGamer
(17,875 posts)marble falls
(68,530 posts)Might help to maybe find another word than twit.
chia
(2,650 posts)all the time here - it's a way of initiating a discussion. I like to hear others express their thoughts too, but perhaps consider meeting people where they are, not where you'd like them to be. Sometimes when you do that, you can uncover a jewel of a person. If they offer a quote, and then you ask them to expand on it and they do, great! If they don't, then that's okay too, no doubt another person will have that conversation with you.
But there are people who literally build an online persona using the thoughts of others to make points.
And if you engage them, they're unable to use their own logic to defend their position.
Don't get me wrong, it's NOT a DU thing... it's a common thing in debate.
Nothing wrong with using a source or citation to back up YOUR own logic but don't substitute the thoughts of others for your own thoughts.
Make sense?
chia
(2,650 posts)you a hard time, either. I hope it doesn't come across that way. I just disagree with your position somewhat. 
Not everyone is capable of creating a logical argument (the way you might view logic) or they don't have as analytical a mind, perhaps they're more intuitive or their ideas are brilliantly laid out in their mind but they have trouble transferring them to the written word. I knew someone like that, who struggled sometimes to find the right words though his mind was incredibly sharp and his creativity ran deep.
Just maybe have a thought for someone, who when they find a quote that says perfectly what they can't (or think they can't) that it's okay if they lean on that source, and say that it speaks for them.
WarGamer
(17,875 posts)I'm specifically talking about folks that post.... (thinking of good example)
Let's say a discussion of panspermia, the theory that life on Earth came from the stars, literally.
Some might respond to every question with a "Television Physicist" quote.
To expand on the conversation... then one might ask "How do you explain the complete lack of evidence for abiogenesis?"
And instead making a passionate argument for or against, they simply produce a theory, or a paper... or a conclusion drawn by someone else.
It reminds me of college.
When you were studying for a Bachelor's Degree, they treat you like a moron. You have to produce a citation and source for every claim you make, no matter how obvious. As you progress in education level, you start referencing your own earlier work, original research.
Debating by cut n pasting pundits and pseudo celebrities and others is intellectually lazy.
Nothing inspires debate like seeing how someone else thinks.
chia
(2,650 posts)and until that auspicious moment in time arrives, I'm reminded once again that every experience changes us. We are not today what we were yesterday or what we will be tomorrow, so I thank you for the conversation, and the fresh understanding it brought me for today.
marble falls
(68,530 posts)
pnwmom
(110,082 posts)WarGamer
(17,875 posts)I'm talking about the endless stream of people expressing OPINION on Twitter and being parroted all over the internet.
mahatmakanejeeves
(66,704 posts)"Nambian leader assassinated in drone strike" can be tweeted in 30 seconds.
A print story won't show up for another fifteen minutes.
OnDoutside
(20,857 posts)software.
Indykatie
(3,864 posts)I also Dislike folks who don't bother to support the site with a subscription complaining about which ads run on the site.
Celerity
(51,979 posts) lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)
flibbitygiblets
(7,220 posts)and/or the author is known for having something great to share.
As for tweets, it used to be that tweets were just links, and that was annoying because I don't want to dive into the twitterverse. But for some time now tweets have been embedded or whatever (often twice, which is a tad annoying but whatever). I don't use the twitter machine myself, so I'm glad someone else is weeding through the quagmire and bringing back gems.
Celerity
(51,979 posts)
Mr. Scorpio
(73,760 posts)Ron Obvious
(6,261 posts)That and youtube links without text.
ms liberty
(10,587 posts)Or Twitter link. We used to have people who wrote OP's themselves, discussing issues. Now it seems to be twitter and meme regurgitation theater. It's probably everywhere though, and not just us. Devolution proceeds apace.
Elessar Zappa
(16,362 posts)Technology proceeds apace. Always has.
ms liberty
(10,587 posts)Technology is not the problem, humans are.
Wicked Blue
(8,234 posts)
Mosby
(19,033 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 16, 2021, 03:58 PM - Edit history (1)
But there should be a way to tell if the OP is just a tweet.
ToxMarz
(2,558 posts)It's kind of like "we watch so you don't have to". I have a Twitter account but don't go there. Kind of like having it curated for me. And they are much easier to share with like minded friends and family than a long form DU post. I don't see why sharing the same information/content in long from post makes it better content.
PatSeg
(50,939 posts)information or links, its not too bad, but it can be annoying to click on a post to find a tweet, which is often from a source that could have been posted in the first place. It really changes the whole atmosphere of Democratic Underground.
LiberalLovinLug
(14,515 posts)Silly to talk about not being able to post Tweets on a News discussion board.
irisblue
(35,959 posts)I cannot post images, of any type, with this low level android phone.
YMMV
Wicked Blue
(8,234 posts)that lack any information as to why I should click on them.
ShazzieB
(21,602 posts)I'm more of a reader than a watcher, tbh. I'm not going to take the time to watch a video without some idea of what it's even about.
Among other things, I'm a little hard of hearing, and the audio quality on videos is not always the best. If I'm on here late at night after I've already taken my hearing aids out for the night (as is often the case), it takes a LOT to make me want to click on a video link.
Also, I'm a VERY fast reader and can skim through dozens of posts in the amount of time it takes to watch some videos.
I love videos for certain things (funny animals, hell yeah) but it's not my favorite way to get information. I'm not saying don't post 'em. Just give me some info so I can decide whether I'm interested. Otherwise, I'm going to be very reluctant to invest my time.
Wicked Blue
(8,234 posts)that clicking on mystery links and videos is a waste of my time
wryter2000
(47,940 posts)I get so sick of looking at "link to tweet." Eventually, the tweet shows up.
I do applaud people who also list the text of the tweet so we don't have to wait for the tweet to load.
FreepFryer
(7,086 posts)Elessar Zappa
(16,362 posts)It’s just a new way to disseminate information.
USALiberal
(10,877 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)That would help.
lillypaddle
(9,605 posts)are any different than posting any other article, or statement. I prefer not to see Onion or Borowitz posts that aren't identified as such, but I realize you can't dictate what other people like. Well, maybe YOU can ...
And the twitter posts run the gamut, just like all the other posts. To suggest that they all be confined in one place is, in my opinion, insulting and ludicrous.
Hamlette
(15,555 posts)don't stop 'em
SWBTATTReg
(25,697 posts)get the same news tips/articles/etc. no matter what online platform you're on. I solely use DU so this good in a way, but I don't like having to get facebook news, it throws me into fb (and I don't have access to fb nor do I want), or it throws me into the tweet world, and I don't have access to this either nor do I want).
I'd prefer that some give a brief snapshot of what they are talking about instead of throwing people into other online platforms to view the particular information that they are presenting. It only takes a few seconds to write up a sentence or two and besides, more than likely, someone else will beat you to the punch and put the information out there in DU land.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)I really don't understand the desire to reject valuable information because it's available that way. I suspect anyone who'd claim it's mostly untrue would either be blowing ignorant smoke or revealing a personal tendency to be drawn to disinformation and junk.
The trick is to reject the latter, and god knows there's more than enough of that for a lifetime available every day. But everyone can design their own feed and cut all else out.
muriel_volestrangler
(104,704 posts)especially in the days of firewalled articles. We can post whatever they put on Twitter without having to have paid accounts with the websites. It's not like DU used to be purely incisive original commentary; we have to face that nearly all of us are amateurs, and few people put the work into great writing here on DU. It's a chatroom for Democrats. Good connections with chat in the rest of the world help it.
SunSeeker
(56,653 posts)Twitter is a key part of how the world communicates now. It's reality.
bucolic_frolic
(52,399 posts)What plagues me about DU is OP's that don't copy and paste the Tweet content which forces me to click and wait
AND the number of images that fail to load, I have to right-click view image and wait.
So yes there's 2 things going on here - instant news and analysis. The rest is culture.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)There are often times I follow a tweet to its origin on Twitter and come across other good stuff there. Plus, some of the Twitter threads have some hilarious posts.
ripcord
(5,553 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)mahina
(20,047 posts)Etc are thinking about. I don’t think I’ve shared them off in here but I found some here that were extremely valuable for me. DU is a Democratic hub, a clearinghouse of sorts. We are a network of networks.
Far from it actually. I think we suffer now from not enough new content. Losing a stream of new content means just scrolling through the same posts day after day and that is not fun.
I read you about not wanting to click links. I feel that way to about many other links. If I do post here I’ll try to include more text.
marble falls
(68,530 posts)
niyad
(127,214 posts)With nothing more. And, since twitter suddenly decided it does not support my browser (hey, I don't particularly like it either!), it seems like a large percentage of posts are closed to me.
It was asked before that, if you are going to link to a tweet, you post the embed.
Frankly, I am a bit disappointed. I had hoped that, with twitler gone, we might see more regular sources..
superpatriotman
(6,749 posts)many of us are unable to see them and provide little to no comment on their copy/paste
dameatball
(7,620 posts)Last edited Tue Mar 16, 2021, 05:14 PM - Edit history (1)
Covid shots. What am I forgetting?
Since that rat bastard got booted out of town it seems we have some time to air petty grievances.
intrepidity
(8,445 posts)That'd be my preference, a way within the subject line to easily identify:
-- Tweets
-- Videos
-- Links
and I mean, when the post consists entirely of *just* the tweet, or video, or link to elsewhere.
Like, in the way when posting you have the option of the post being a Poll -- if there were an option for the above categories, so the post is automatically designated, that'd be helpful. I realize that's an admin backend coding thing, though.
Absent that, and many have posted on this before, there are ways to posts tweets that are more user-friendly than others (hint: if clicking on the content within the Tweet causes my device to launch the Twitter app, I'm not happy, because it momentarily hogs all resources).
taxi
(2,493 posts)This is my post (v) ... videos
This is my post (l) ... links
on edit - maybe not for links, they're expected
intrepidity
(8,445 posts)taxi
(2,493 posts)intrepidity
(8,445 posts)intrepidity
(8,445 posts)taxi
(2,493 posts)intrepidity
(8,445 posts)taxi
(2,493 posts)I think it had started long before skipping school and hitchhiking to a George McGovern campaign rally in the rain. One of these days I'll grow out of it?
I can still recall one of my middle school classmate's zeal for McGovern, it was my first real glimpse of political activism in a young kid, so thumbs up to you 
(but keep the "nt" -- they save lives)
PufPuf23
(9,564 posts)in the 1972 primary and POTUS election.
That is 50 years as of next election where I have been a member of the Democratic party and have voted exclusively Democratic except for voted for John Anderson in the CA POTUS primary to slow Reagan (had been told that the most powerful way to leverage a vote was to vote against the strongest candidate in the opposing parties primary, have zero idea if that is a fact but was the motivation at the time).
taxi
(2,493 posts)I was 17 at the time and although I couldn't vote I could and did show support by adding my voice. Florida has a closed primary and there have been times that I've switched registration for the purpose of weakening the strongest opposing candidate. My new strategy is a 10 for 10 approach, but it hasn't been used yet. What it means is that I will donate 10 cents to a republican candidate, and I will do it ten times, using a credit card of course. At a dollar a pop I can support many candidates whom I dislike.
lpbk2713
(43,232 posts)Before Twitter there would be the occasional OP with a subject line like This is cool
And the body of the post would be a blind link. That would result in a new addition to my Ignore List.
Guess what I do now with posts that just have a twitter link?
DavidDvorkin
(20,344 posts)
rurallib
(64,134 posts)I myself do not want to spend a bunch of time combing through twitter for what little is of value. I really appreciate the people on here who do that and then share the good and important stuff with us.
DallasNE
(7,871 posts)Some Twitter threads make for an interesting conversation. Others lack much in the way of content other than, perhaps, a clever wording choice. How do you administratively separate the two?
What I dislike more is the tease posts. An interesting headline that you click on only to find nothing there - not even a link to a story. I guess some people get a kick out of "made you look".
BluesRunTheGame
(1,865 posts)I don’t have a Twitter account so this is the only place I see them.
ornotna
(11,345 posts)To see how I should respond to this. 
Autumn
(48,357 posts)Mister Ed
(6,684 posts)But I liked the content better in the days before the site became a compendium of links to tweets.
JoeOtterbein
(7,856 posts)...Towlie repeater on this one!
rainin
(3,246 posts)
CaptainTruth
(7,883 posts)Gilbert Moore
(220 posts)Would be nice if all links that went to articles behind a paywall were clearly identified as such. I also want a pony !
Justice
(7,212 posts)Not just the link would help ease the problem.
intrepidity
(8,445 posts)patphil
(8,255 posts)
japple
(10,459 posts)yaesu
(8,622 posts)
Lucinda
(31,170 posts) Kaleva
(39,910 posts)Preach it from the top of the mountain!
yellowdogintexas
(23,472 posts)besides, what would the Lounge be without hilarious Twitter posts?
taxi
(2,493 posts)Creating a forum for tweets would ultimately lessen our exposure to events, and in doing so inadvertently cut the legs out from newer issues destined to be tomorrow's news.
A decision to expose DU members to the content of such tweets would require someone to monitor, research, and publish in an OP the content of the tweet. As it is now each individual member makes that decision.
A solution for those members unable to view tweets may be to a) indicate in the post title by some method that the post contains a tweet, eg, This is my post (t), or b) use the tools provided for trending, most recommended, and most discussed.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)
frogmarch
(12,244 posts)BlueBassLines
(19 posts)OverBurn
(1,275 posts)
myccrider
(484 posts)I have more of a problem with posts that just copy the headline, the leed and the first paragraph that are all the same sentence. When they finally get to the story, the 4 paragraph rule seems to kick in and I have to klick the link to know any more than the headline anyway. That’s a bit irritating.
But then a lot of different things can be irritating to different people. You say toe-mah-toe, I say toe-may-toe.
jase024
(3 posts)So it's kind of nice to be able to see the tweets that would interest me here
demmiblue
(38,719 posts)I use the trash function for many of those posts.
Also, you can put people on ignore if you feel that they are affecting your DU experience.
JohnnyRingo
(20,160 posts)They're usually ok, but it seems like the lazy person way of posting. Clickety Click...maybe it'll hit the greatest page, and that's fine if it's a stellar tweet, but too many are sheer chaff and it's gotten out of control. I don't want them gone, just selective. A Twitter group may be a good idea but the lounge should be fair game for anything
I very seldom rec a reTweet.
peggysue2
(12,178 posts)In a very short/sweet format.
You can't follow everyone, so a really good or provocative tweet is fun, maybe even informative to share with others. A lot of the tweets I've read here or shared (occasionally) spark discussion, pro or con. Which is what we all do on DU anyway discussing the latest headlines or events, sharing our thoughts, our gripes, our approval.
I don't think we've reached a saturation point with the tweet sharing where that's all there is to read. And for some members, we're sharing what they themselves are unable to access.
So right now, it works for me. Just my opinion.
bluedigger
(17,320 posts)I ain't got time for that.
intrepidity
(8,445 posts)Do that with tweets (tw) or videos (vid) or links (lnk).
If enough of us adopt that convention, it may catch on and make a difference.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I s'pose if not for the linked feeds, I'd have zero idea what that particular social medium is up to on any given day. Anyways, as 90% of posts herald their meanings and/or sources in the header, one additional finger twitch to scroll the mouse wheel past one isn't any great sacrifice to me.
Either I'm incredibly lucky and against all odds click only on the links that interest me, or the vast majority of posts are front-loaded with the relevant info already in the header. And I ain't a real lucky guy...
onethatcares
(16,915 posts)I get tired of seeing duplicate posts, over and over and over and over and over and who the fark cares about rog stone after that many times?
but your mileage may vary. 
Bucky
(55,334 posts)
marble falls
(68,530 posts)Bucky
(55,334 posts)EVERY THING!
Just as soon as I find that part of Twitter that isn't a complete moshpit trash-0-thon
womanofthehills
(10,378 posts)If it was eliminated from DU, we would definitely be behind in the news.
LearnedHand
(5,011 posts)that I’d never have discovered otherwise. Remember this, for example?
https://mobile.twitter.com/burnedyourtweet
And the article about its account?
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/twitter-account-burning-donald-trumps-013813731.html
Lisa0825
(14,491 posts)bigtree
(92,513 posts)...twitter is by far the largest source of news and information, political news and information in particular.
Yay that you liked it when there was less actual info available here.
I want more, not less.
dilby
(2,273 posts)I get to see stuff I would miss and honestly I enjoy most of the stuff I see.
Sugarcoated
(8,195 posts)I've suggested there be a section just for all the twitter posts
kentuck
(114,655 posts)...as often as they profit from DU.
TigressDem
(5,126 posts)
betsuni
(28,332 posts)
ecstatic
(34,929 posts)
Is it really that serious? The way I see it, the only people with a legitimate gripe are those who literally can't see the Twitter posts due to work firewalls, etc.
Also, I think some people are unfairly lumping all Twitter-content OPs together. Yes, some tweets are a silly waste of time, but there are plenty of silly, substance-free posts on DU that don't even involve Twitter. I know because I've authored some. Lol!
MineralMan
(149,772 posts)Some are not. That is true of almost everything posted in GD.
When DU developed the ability to retrieve tweets from a link to the tweet, that was a good thing for those who don't have Twitter accounts. But, then, some people complained that their computers were blocked from Twitter, so people started posting the content of the tweet, along with the link that would get DU to show the tweet in the post.
Many people like seeing such tweets. Some people do not. That is true of almost everything posted in GD.
Like every website I don't own, DU displays what its users post. Posting of tweets are allowed in GD, so people post tweets here. Some people like them. Some people do not.
I post on DU. Some people like my posts. Some people do not.
I don't own DU. I come here because people post stuff here, including tweets. I like some posts. Some posts I do not like. It is not my website, so I deal with it.
Towlie
(5,550 posts)
←
MineralMan
(149,772 posts)But, it's not my website, so I don't complain that I don't like some posts.
The answer to your question, which was "How about you?" is that I explained that in my reply. I like DU just fine. If I don't like a post, I move on to another post. It's not my website, so I take it as it is, without complaint.
Pluvious
(5,065 posts)The sharing of tweets here on DU by everyone is effectively a curatorial service to us all.
Not just limited to "breaking" news items, but also humor, memes, and comments from common folks to celebrities.
The DU posters are performing an editorial selection for our benefit, delivering the gems directly our eyes, saving us all from wading thru the ocean of tweets ourselves
I just wish DU's code would strip off the extraneous query strings. I'm so OCD I'd have fixed this long ago !!
( but I'm not complaining, DU's the best, warts and all haha )
LAS14
(15,327 posts)...Twitter myself to see the things I'm likely to be interested in.