Why are so many DU posts just links to twitter? This has increased greatly recently.
Last edited Wed Dec 22, 2021, 04:19 PM - Edit history (1)
I have a twitter account but really don't want that organization to know that I am interested in a story posted on DU. But many people have been simply posting a title and a twitter link as their full story.
Twitter just recently changed CEOs and probably changed its company structure, motivations, etc. I don't know that I can trust whoever now owns them.
Does DU encourage this type of linkage? If so, why?
**** Note that my issue happened because of a privacy blocker add-on. See post below. ****
= new reply since forum marked as read
Oh, that's keeper! 
I suppose some of it is laziness, but also, I think many people are on information overload and can only absorb so much. Meanwhile, I don't care much for Twitter and I believe it has contributed to a lot of shallowness in our society. I go there occasionally for some posts, but I don't linger long - get in and get out! I think the world was a better place pre-Twitter.
but I have observed how it has affected our society and news reporting, especially since Trump got involved in politics. I also have seen how addictive it has been for some friends of mine, people who used to spend a lot of time on DU. Some of it wasn't very healthy.
Meanwhile, I appreciate your response and I have responded similarly to people who diss Facebook. How Facebook affects us depends on how we use it. For me, it has been primarily positive, though I have some
issues with the company and their policies. That said, I really have no use for Twitter. We all have our own preferences and Twitter just doesn't work for me. 
And people want to share them? 
Now do The Hill, Politico and the Daily Mail.
The tweets speak for themselves in most cases.
I am a busy man with lots of things to do so I LOVE simple OP's that I can spend just a few seconds time reading and comprehending.
And the same when I post them - and I post them a LOT! (Ignore me if it really bothers you. I don't mind.)
I make sure to try and paste the linked tweet so IF others want to click it they can, or else they can wait and hopefully someone else with a bit more time on their hands will reply. Or they can see it is a tweet post and move on with little time wasted.
Replies are where the details are IF the community thinks the OP is worthwhile enough to reply to. If not it dies a quick death. No Harm No foul.
I also like in depth OP's and video's when I have time to read or watch them.
To each his own.
If you don't like tweet OP's then simply trash them, ignore them and move on...why stress yourself over them.
Kind of along the same line more or less.
If you like a item you hit the like button.
It takes one to Facebook. Why that Reuke:
site? 
Quite a number of rants are really
outstanding. How does one show appreciation.
Seriously. Can’t a tick mark be made that
shows ones appreciation? Not an FB fan.
the subject of the post gives some indication of what the Tweet is about. The ones that really drive me up the wall are posts with subject lines reading "Firstname Lastname Tweet," or "Firstname Lastname for the win!" etc. These are about as useful as "This!" I open none of these posts.
How about something like "Firstname Lastname on a path forward for BBB" or "Tweet: Voting rights protection now!," and so on.
Then, for bonus points, perhaps the body of the post might contain an original sentence or two 
, or offer an opinion about why this particular Tweet or series of Tweets is worth reading.
I support EarlG's position that link-to-Tweet posts shouldn't be banned, but I guarantee I will continue leaving these posts unopened when the subject line offers not even a hint of the contents. I wish there were a way to automatically ignore such threads, although I won't put the authors of the OPs on Ignore since they may post valuable responses within threads.
to figure out whether I want to click on something
