> Twitter, on the other hand, baffles me. It's, like, this huge Internet
> phenomenon. Your corporation is /nothing/ unless it's on Twitter. And
> yet... Well, let me put it this way. I once had this conversation with
> my dad:
>
> Dad: So what *is* Twitter then?
> Me: You know how on Facebook you can post your status?
> Dad: Yeah?
> Me: THAT'S ALL TWITTER DOES!!
> Dad: ...WTF?
>
> Not only that, but the few times I've actually been on Twitter, half the
> posts are replies to other people's posts, and there is LITERALLY NO WAY
> to find out what they're replies to. (!) Seriously, the most basic, most
> immediately obvious thing, the very first thing I tried to do, Twitter
> can't do. WTF?
>

I don't know if it's your eye-sight, or you are overlooking an obvious 
feature just for the sake of a good rant, but you can "unroll the 
conversation" to see exactly what they are replying to.  If it's not 
there, them the person you are following was not really replying to 
anything someone said on Twitter.  They might have "replied" to 
something the person said on tv or in a newspaper.

Also, the strength of Twitter is not following certain individuals, 
although that can be interesting in the case of public figures or 
journalists, but following keywords (or hashtags), this way you can see 
what everyone has to say about topic X.  This come especially handy in 
fast moving situations or live events, where no one has a complete 
picture of what is going on.

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message