This is interesting, and I kind of agree. That said, as I was nodding my head I realized that I posted a link to twitter just this morning, and thought about why.

In this case, I read something from the BBC and the article was largely based off the few twitter posts it was citing. It seemed better to link the primary source then the secondary.

Sometimes there is newsworthy stuff that's also original content on twitter; we should still discuss that in the fediverse, no?

@devlaf @resist__berlin sure i guess, but the larger point is that sharing should be a manual decision rather than a torrent of automated stuff


@trwnh @resist__berlin@chaos.social

Yeah, I agree it certainly shouldn't be an automated thing.

It's strange to me that twitter is so frequently cited by major news outlets like that, but that's the world we live in I guess? 😞

@trwnh @resist__berlin@chaos.social

I don't have the same distaste for the platform as many folks in the fediverse, but I imagine that's largely because I haven't interacted with it much (don't have an account.) I've heard that there's a lot of crappy vitriol and I believe it, I just haven't seen it personally.

When it comes to twitter I kind of live under a rock.

@devlaf @trwnh @resist__berlin I have no hard feelings towards Twitter either, but I am regularly irritated by people boosting a toot that starts with “RT user@twitter.com“ with the content being that user commenting on something by quoting another tweet.

That's just way too many unnecessary layers. :D

@esureL @devlaf @resist__berlin this is exactly what manual sharing allows avoiding :) and also what is bad about quote tweets in the first place: they should be flat replies, but are instead nested links! twitter erases this distinction visually in its own apps.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

small, relaxed instance for friends