Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PLEASE STOP POSTING LINKS TO TWEETS !!!!! [View all]Bernardo de La Paz
(50,302 posts)37. Yes, please post content (text / image(s)). Saves all readers time. Write for readers, please.
Boils down to convenience for ONE writer vs. convenience of 100s of readers. Assymetric
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8762614
In the General Discussion forum, most threads have at least 300 views. Many have much more, but that would include multiple views as discussions progress. But let's assume 300 readers per Original Post and per most posts at the beginning of a thread as a lower bound on the number.
Dashing off quick OP with an opaque title and a sentence or two saves the writer time. Let's say it takes 30 seconds to do that. For comparison, let's say that a more informative title and several sentences summarizing key points and making a convincing case to view the video (live or YouTube) takes two minutes, 120 seconds for a little more typing and a little more thinking.
On the other side of the equation, a reader reading the better written OP can read it and decide whether to pursue it further within say 20 seconds. But dashed-off OP can easily take 60 seconds to puzzle out what it is referring to and then to glean from sparse clues enough information to decide to whether to pursue it.
However, to dramatize the case, let's suppose the difference in time is only 6 seconds instead of 40 seconds.
If there are 300 readers for every writer, dashing off an OP saves the writer 90 seconds and costs the readers 300 x 6 = 1800 seconds or half an hour.
On the other side of the ledger, if the writer spends an extra 90 seconds she/he saves readers half an hour of time.
Now, isn't it progressive and considerate to invest a mere 90 seconds to save the community a half hour?
Multiply that out by dozens of threads and it becomes easy to see that considerate writers make the community much more efficient.
Who is the writer writing for anyway? Their own ego or the edification and enjoyment of 300 readers?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
83 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Yes, please be thorough and post both links for those who enjoy Twitter.
StrictlyRockers
Apr 2018
#20
If you post the RIGHT LINK to it, it shows the LIVE TWEET in the post. You can click on the tweet...
Honeycombe8
Apr 2018
#63
Like a request for folks to post a sentence or two context for videos, that is not likely to happen
hlthe2b
Apr 2018
#3
I dislike links without any accompanying information...try not to be lazy folks
pecosbob
Apr 2018
#6
I have no problem with links to tweets. I don't understand why others do.
Binkie The Clown
Apr 2018
#13
While we're at it, how about people who post "Did you see what Rachael just said? Awesome!"
Binkie The Clown
Apr 2018
#50
And clicking/viewing a twitter link on DU will record a lot of activity about you.
erronis
Apr 2018
#36
Yes, please post content (text / image(s)). Saves all readers time. Write for readers, please.
Bernardo de La Paz
Apr 2018
#37
I post the link AND the content, and it's my intention to continue to do both. n/t
Miles Archer
Apr 2018
#42
Posters who do that are too lazy to do it properly. Twitter info is just useless clickbait anyway.
PSPS
Apr 2018
#43
Can we have a Tweet Forum/group and maybe a front page section of just 'top tweets of the day'
TalenaGor
Apr 2018
#47
PLEASE if the tweet includes a link to an article - POST that link - and some information
csziggy
Apr 2018
#51
And no humming or whistling a tune unless you're prepared to tell everyone who the band is,
LanternWaste
Apr 2018
#57
Usually the tweet shows in the post. They're doing the link wrong if the tweet doesn't show.
Honeycombe8
Apr 2018
#61
I post links to tweets. You can click on the tweet & it'll take you to the original in twitter.
Honeycombe8
Apr 2018
#68
I know. Workplace blocking things is a drawback to trying to do social media on employer's equipment
Honeycombe8
Apr 2018
#71
Tweets may not display for a few reasons, and they usually have nothing to do with poster error.
Denzil_DC
Apr 2018
#67
There are at least two good reasons always to copy and paste the content of a tweet
Denzil_DC
Apr 2018
#64