Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm finding a lot of the comments on this thread either wrong, or just silly


As a news aggregator I often read stories a day or two before publication in several papers thanks to twitter. In that sense it is no worse, and often more useful than what most people posting on here do online - which is neither here nor there apart from the fact that people seem to dismiss it or look down their nose at it


I have never sent a message about my breakfast or ablutions - clicheville. And look at the name it's got "twit" in it - hahahahahahaahahh. And it sounds like twat!! Hilarious


sheesh


I'm guessing most of the people condemning it have never used it in earnest


As for the form itself it probably is a stopgap for something else - entirely likely that in 24 months the name twitter will be history - but the concept will be integrated into something else


And any political party which ignores it as a communications tool ould be very foolish indeed

Fair point. Although you can't dispute the fact that SOME people use it (and other social network sites, forums, blogs, etc) in a pointless manner (again, my view only).


OK, maybe my view is not specific to twitter and I have the same view on those who feel compelled to post their exact movements on facebook.




SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm finding a lot of the comments on this thread

> either wrong, or just silly

>

> As a news aggregator I often read stories a day or

> two before publication in several papers thanks to

> twitter. In that sense it is no worse, and often

> more useful than what most people posting on here

> do online - which is neither here nor there apart

> from the fact that people seem to dismiss it or

> look down their nose at it

>

> I have never sent a message about my breakfast or

> ablutions - clicheville. And look at the name it's

> got "twit" in it - hahahahahahaahahh. And it

> sounds like @#$%&!! Hilarious

>

> sheesh

>

> I'm guessing most of the people condemning it have

> never used it in earnest

>

> As for the form itself it probably is a stopgap

> for something else - entirely likely that in 24

> months the name twitter will be history - but the

> concept will be integrated into something else

>

> And any political party which ignores it as a

> communications tool ould be very foolish indeed

Most of these things do have practical uses but would amount to nothing if it wasn't for peoples desperate insecurities driving them to prove their importance in an uncaring universe by collecting friends like so many pokemon and splashing themselves on every modern media possible; or a solopsistic need to persuade themselves of their own existence. I twit therefore I am.


He interjected on an interweb forum, listen to me, affirm me, I matter.....I.....will get my coat....

Most of these things do have practical uses but would amount to nothing if it wasn't for peoples desperate insecurities driving them to prove their importance



- would amount to nothing


+ would be much better


I use Twitter for work. I can monitor lots of people pointing out and linking to articles and items of common interest. Inevitably there is some flag-waving and self-promotion, but it's easily ignored.


I don't really understand the hostility to the actual service, although the hagiographic media articles about it are indeed annoying.

I use it to keep up with rumours about my team - as I am on O2 I can subscribe to tweets by text. As far as I am concerned it is absolutely pointless following more than about 50 people (depending upon how much they twitter as I could never keep up.


I do follow a few celebs but not many. I follow a couple of journalist from a IT magazine that I subscribe to and of course I follow the delightful Dulwichmum.


Only time will tell whether it will last.


Strangely none of my close friends are on twitter but they are on Facebook as I am.


I would agree with Sean - the majority of those who condemn it probably have never used it.


Actually I have heard that somewhere before.... oh yes, the Millennium Dome. Many of those who critised it never went. I thought it was great - I spend 8 hours there and still never got to see all of it.

Ok, Ok, I've never used it - but having an opinion about something I've not a clue about has never stopped me before. But conceptually it's up there with the updates on facebook, once you've too many friends (i've 7) it gets a bit of a pain...I should give it a go but spend enough time on here as it is

I been using twitter for few weeks was intially quite fun then it soon becomes quite boring. If you follow some of the celebs they use it just as an advertising platform. After you follow more and more people it gets to the point where you dont have time to read them anymore. recommend using tweetdeck application if your going to try it


IT solutions for everyone

www.linktechnicalservices.co.uk

I find Twitter great fun. It is a bit disappionting that people are so dismissive of it, I remember when I first heard of Facebook, it was a link someone posted on the forum, and I seem to remember that people couldn't see the point of it then.


Two days ago my favourite leather handbag was savaged by my darling cockapoo and I sulked and had a tantrum about it on Twitter. Mulberry have contacted me via Twitter and offered to repair it for me.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Hi - I posted a request for some help with a stuck door and possible leaky roof. I had responses from Lukasz at Look_as.com and Pawel at Sublime Builders. I don't see any/many reviews - has anyone used either person?  Could use a recommendation rather then just being contact by the tradespeople... Many Thanks 
    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson rather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...