Goodness! What fantastic potential this has for being really annoying!

(Reply) (Thread)

Potential already quite some way realized, I think you'll find.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

The right icon for the job.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

What, are you allergic to the # symbol or something? It's the new punctuation, soon any paragraph not sprinkled liberally with it will look quaint and antique, you hater!

Really there should be an application to transform tweetmeats into proper, readable, joined-up English though. I'm pretty sure Oscar Wilde had one.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I'm reading them as sharp signs, with your voice progressively modulating upwards. Dogs in the neighbourhood are now howling.

I think Oscar summed it up when he intimated "Twitter aggregations are like a streak of bat's piss."

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

They shine out like a shaft of gold when all around is dark?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Something like that, I'm sure.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I am very taken by this application idea. Hmm.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

shipment received=, accepted, signed for and devoured...

I like the twitter aggregation posts. Part cut-up project, part stream-of-consciousness, part what-the-hell-caused-that-thought?, part lost-passport-photos-in-Amelie.

Seems to cause vociferous reactions of hatred from some though. What's your twitter ID?

(Reply) (Thread)

@thesunneversets...

I quite like Twitter for now, it's not like I don't get bored after about 140 characters of a single train of thought anyway, but perhaps what happens on Twitter should stay on Twitter.

It seems not worth posting to LiveJournal these days unless one has an essay in mind somehow, and the mere thought is quite fatiguing.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Was it ever "worth" posting to LiveJournal?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I've always said, if it's worth doing something, it's worth going off and wasting time on LiveJournal for a few hours instead.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I am very much for Twitter staying on Twitter.

Twitter and LJ are good at very different things. LJ for structured journal-writing, Twitter for rather more immediate stream-of-consciousness rants/ramblings/temporary botherations/news-flashes.

LJ = letters (for posterity)
Twitter = postcards/telegrams (for the lulz/speed)

Twitter does encourage economy of style, but I prefer verbosity as I really like interesting use of language. I also quite like the effort needed to make an LJ post: that way I'm not tempted to inflict the 5000000 mood changes/random thoughts/crazy ideas/flies in my soup that I undergo every day on everyone.

If I used Twitter at all, it would only be for very close friends and family or if I really, really needed the latest information on something.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Like I say, I think Twitter's great achievement, if any, will be taking the negligible-content posts for the sake of posts off LJ, to a safe, enclosed containment facility. I remember suffering great weariness in skimming through my LJ flist looking for somethings amidst the copious nothing. If most of the nothing gets farmed out to Twitter, everybody wins!

I'm a bit disturbed that after about a week of messing around on Twitter, I can no longer think of anything I really want to say that I can't say in 140-character soundbites, though. What is happening to my brain?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Oh, God, not you too.

(Reply) (Thread)

New toys are fun! I have no belief that Twitter is any kind of breakthrough in human communication - I only went and signed up for it out of disgust at reading yet another article about it being some kind of revolutionary, game-changing phenomenon. And then I thought, once I was there, in for a penny, in for a pound...

I like the fact that it stops you from inflating your trivial thoughts into anything bigger (e.g. an LJ post) - you just throw them out there and think no more about them. Then again, maybe encouraging people to articulate their every trivial thought in public is a really bad idea, especially when they, er, aggregate them onto LiveJournal too. It was only once! I can stop any time!

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I don't really care about Twitter one way or the other. What I hate is the way that people who don't sign up for Twitter are subjected to other people's tweets no matter where on the Internet they happen to be. The people who use Loudtwitter seem to be of the opinion that I have a reason for not being on Twitter besides the obvious one: I don't want to read their fucking tweets.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Hmm, if they post a picture do you say "if I wanted to see fucking images I'd log onto Flickr"? I agree that uncritical, automated cross-posting of stuff across multiple sites, done by lots of people, would get out of hand very quickly. Today I just wanted to see what Loudtwitter would do. I don't think the result is much more nonsensical than any other LJ post I might come up with, apart from the revolting and illegible formatting.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

"Uncritical, automated cross-posting of stuff across multiple sites, done by lots of people" kind of defines my friends page (and my Facebook page) these days. I've started taking Loudtwitter users off my default view because I'm so sick of it. I kind of envy you for having been shielded from it for so long.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

There is a way the twitterer can make LoudTwitter automatically post behind an LJ-cut, which might help. I'm a lot more tolerant of those on my friends' page than I am of the raw twits.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Ah, it's the fact that everyone is at it, I see. I'm ashamed to say that I haven't been reading a lot of LiveJournal since LoudTwitter came along, only keeping up with 2 or 3 journals on even a semi-regular basis, but now I come to think of it even 33.33% of THOSE have dabbled in LoudTwittering.

I don't think I will let Twitter onto my LiveJournal any more, but I think it's nice that I have one post of Twittering and outraged responses to it, so I can look back in 20 years time and say: "Ooh, I had a Twitter account myself for a while, didn't I? Before it became illegal and punishable by the stocks and fifty lashes."

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

That is all.

(Reply) (Thread)

A dire prophecy of doom! I shall try to forestall it.

I've always said that I would quite like it if the human race became telepathic, so everyone could know what everyone else was thinking all of the time. If everyone Twitters "every stupid, pointless thing they do" then we will have achieved a low level of that!

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I confess, my first response is TL; DR

It's so frikkin DENSE and so little actual INFORMATION

Luddite WTB Twitfilters, PST.

(Reply) (Thread)

Re: 07.54 - you are so right.

'New England' came on HSBC Radio yesterday while I was waiting to pay a bill. It's so radical.

(Reply) (Thread)

I relistened to both versions today, with a vague preconception that I would like Kirsty's better - I think she's lovely. But the song is so marvellously ambivalent with a guy singing it. It loses a lot if it's being sung by a blameless woman about her boyfriend who's probably a jerk, that's much too easy.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Mm. Kirsty's version has the fab extra verse, but Bragg's is realer. And the I DON'T where the guitar drops out is one of the best moments in pop ever.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

I really need to find a friendly dachl (it is usually 'dachl' rather than 'dachshund' in German use - i.e. the dimunitive form) over here to appear in some suitable mock period photos with me. :)

The Kaiser had a whole pack of them, which can be seen trundling along behind him in much of the surviving newsreel footage. They also appear very frequently in German photos of the period (which I collect). A friend of mine in Germany has a fine original album of mainly off-duty photos from a member of this terrifying elite flamethrower assault unit. The gentleman in question (a Sergeant or thereabouts) nearly always appears in the photos with his little dachl on his arm.

(Reply) (Thread)

I'm sorry, this does not compute.

I prefer tweets to be crossposted to Facebook (if they HAVE to be crossposted anywheres) otherwise, I prefer real lj-posts with veritable content that I can wade through semi-effectively.

(Reply) (Thread)

Hee hee. I dispute that Twitter isn't "veritable content" (if it isn't, it's only because people make it so... it's like saying that epigrams aren't veritable poetry), but the formatting issues are an immense hurdle. Which you will be pleased to hear I am not going to try to surmount!

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Good. I agree that it CAN have veritable content, but I do prefer more regular text.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)