Loudtwitter thoughts?

[charmian]

Poll #1737 What do you think about Loudtwitter digests in LJ or DW?

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 61

View Respondents

Do you use Twitter?

View Answers

I use Twitter frequently
34 (55.7%)

I have an account, but use it infrequently
17 (27.9%)

I only use my account to read
2 (3.3%)

I don't have a Twitter account
8 (13.1%)

Other (write in comments)
0 (0.0%)

What do you think of Loudtwitter digests in LJ or DW?

View Answers

I use Loudtwitter myself to post my tweets
2 (3.3%)

I don't use it, but I like it
3 (5.0%)

Indifferent; I don't care one way or the other
14 (23.3%)

Dislike because I use Twitter and so it's something I already see
16 (26.7%)

Dislike because I don't like to read tweets
12 (20.0%)

Dislike for some other reason (comment on your own)
8 (13.3%)

Other (write in comments)
5 (8.3%)

This question was vaguely inspired by the new LJ account on... Facebook, where they seem to be asking people about such issues. I'm actually kind of surprised that there wasn't an official page already.

Comments

[gchick]

I hate Loudtwitter because it gets the Twitter experience so completely *wrong*. The point of Twitter is the stream, and LT it the equivalent of reading Facebook by going to one person's wall at a time. If Facebook didn't have comments, likes, etc. Dreadful.

[charmian]

Yeah, one of the problems I see about Loudtwitter is all of the @replies are stuck in there also, and then to see then, you'd have to go to Twitter anyway.

[foxfirefey]

You didn't have an "I like them" option! I like LoudTwitter digests on my reading/friends pages, because they mean I get to read it as a summary chunk of somebody's day, and quickly scan for anything interesting. And, usually if it's somebody who doesn't make interesting ones, it's cut and easy to skip over.

[charmian]

Heh, I just assumed if you use them, you like them, and I included a "I don't use it, but I like it" to cover the other case.

[torachan]

I read Twitter several times a day, but I don't always post daily. I dislike Loud Twitter because I don't particularly want to read one person's tweets in a lump like that. I just skip over them automatically.

[afuna]

I post my tweets to my LJ, as a more permanent archive, in case I need to look back for a particular link or tidbit of information. I used to backdate the entries so they would be in my journal but not on anyone's friendspage, but I had a couple of friends grumble about having to visit my journal to catch up with those entries so, uh, I stopped backdating.

I sometimes read tweet digests if I don't follow the person on Twitter, but I skip over those I follow since I've already read them as they were tweeted (in context, too).

Uhhh I guess I'm not sure where I fall in the like/dislike of the digests.

[damned_colonial]

Don't like it because I come to DW for long-form prose, and can't switch modes that quickly while reading my reading page. If someone posts Loudtwitter stuff uncut, I will generally unsubscribe.

[phoenix]

gchick and damned_colonial have the same issues with Loudtwitter posts as I do. They're Doing Twitter Wrong ™, and breaking up the usual flow of longer-form posts on my reading list.

[azurelunatic]

I also archive.

I don't use LoudTwitter to do it; a friend wrote and hosts a custom script that does it for a handful of people.

Unlike LoudTwitter, it's not all-or-nothing; it's got the first five tweets uncut and the rest cut, so it's actually useful to me as a summary.

I loathe it when a Twitter archive doesn't link back to the original Twitter entries, because if it does link back, then I can follow the 'in reply to' links and get context. (If someone's client breaks the 'in reply to', or if someone breaks them on purpose, I get WRATHFUL.)

If I could not feed Twitter into LJ/DW, I would not use Twitter.

[sophie]

I don't like seeing them mostly because if I *did* want to see them, I'd use Twitter more. (You didn't have an option for that.) The two sites are different dynamics.

[niqaeli]

As others have noted, LT is Doin' It Rong. I mean, I like Twitter because it's sanely useable in a way that Facebook Walls AREN'T.

Now, I can see why people would like to archive their twitter to some place more searchable and less obnoxious to look at deep history, but I don't particularly want to see your archive.

Also, the formatting pisses me the fuck off. I don't even know, really! It just -- grates, at least when there's a lot of tweets. One or two I don't mind so much. But more than that and I find it highly unreadable.

Basically, if you use it heavily, and you post it uncut, I will almost certainly drop you. At least until the GM script that Fey wrote gets a little more sophisticated and I can auto-collapse Twitter crap.

[sofiaviolet]

I ignore LoudTwitter posts - if I want to see the other person's tweets, then I'm already following them on twitter.

But I don't mind them - I have a userscript that collapses and expands posts on my reading page (so I don't have to scroll). On lj, I'm subscribed to people's posts via the notification system, so the full text shows up in my lj inbox, and I can delete anything I don't feel like reading.

[sub_divided]

I like some people's LoudTwitters and dislike other people's. In theory I'd rather read a lot of little updates at once than one at a time -- it's like your thing about reading shonen jump all at once, it's just a more efficient use of my time -- actually I'd rather wait a few days, then go directly to whoevers twitter home page and read everything there.

Loudtwitter fails because it's harder to visually skip the @ replies, so I don't like reading the Loudtwitters of people who have a lot of @ replies, or of people who have a lot of disconnected thoughts. Short stories told over several tweets work best.

[dingsi]

This. Times three. I have a strong dislike of LT because if I wanted to twitter or follow other people's tweets, I'd get a Twitter account to do it. Or subscribe to an RSS feed. DW/IJ are different and I use them for different reasons; I don't actually want the two to intersect. (That unfortunately I mostly encountered users who didn't cut their LT posts certainly didn't help.)

[matgb]

Agreed. I used to use LT to feed all my posts in, but these days it goes to a filter that only a few people see (at their request). I think my approach changed at around the time LT stopped skipping the @replies, which was a change Twitter made to how it handles them, but also when I stopped using Twitter as an SMS to LJ replacement which is what I initially signed up to it for.

Having said that, my post on how to remove the contents of posts from your reading page is my most linked post ever, lots of people really dislike it.

[falena]

Like many other people pointed out, DeeWee/LJ and Twitter fill two very different roles in my online life.

So, whilst I like Twitter, I most definitely do not want to see tweets pop up all over my reading list.

I find it extremely annoying when someone doesn't put their LT posts under a cut (even though I don't generally unsubscribe, because I can always scroll down).

[syderia]

I don't like LoudTwitter for two reasons :
* the digest form makes things weird : I would be ok with reading a tweet that someone had just had the most awesome burger, seeing it on DeeWee/LJ, without more context added, is strange
* I tend to consider that the things posted on Twitter are very different from the things posted on DeeWee/LJ, mainly in terms of context, but also sometimes of content.

As I have a Twitter account, I fairly happy to keep Twitter stuff on Twitter, and I implemented something that gets rid of the LoudTwitter output on my reading list/f-list.

[foxfirefey]

I think I just have reading comprehension problems. ::headdesk::

[papercoversrock]

Only one person on my LJ uses LT and so far no one here on DW, and I track everything to my inbox there instead of reading my friends page, so I rarely see enough of it to bother me. I did use it myself at one point, but for some reason it wasn't filtering or cutting properly and a couple people mentioned it so I stopped it all together.

[azurelunatic]

LoudTwitter specifically, I'm not very fond of, but it will do in the absence of a better archiving system. There are some people who are low-volume enough, and that I'm not sufficiently connected to, that seeing their updates in lump form is better than reading them on Twitter.

[jassanja]

I dislike Loudtwitter because some peole just use that tool instead of writting real posts


but then I also blame twitter for people becomming micro-bloggy on pages where they have more space

10 years ago one line posts were frowned upon, now everything that doesn't fit in a line is tl;dr

[cesy]

I also like skimming other people's, but I post mine privately, because I know some people get annoyed by them. I got annoyed until I discovered matgb's CSS trick to hide the ones you don't want to see.

[cesy]

You know you can hide it with CSS in your style, right? Then you get their other entries but not the LoudTwitter.

[cesy]

You can already auto-collapse it. See matgb's instructions.

[piranha]

i use it myself, but not primarily to communicate with people on DW -- if they wanted to read my twitter, i figure they'd follow me. except for my partners, *heh*. they hate twitter, but want to see what i say. but i mainly use it to archive my tweets and to be able to search them quickly later. i cut the entire text, so it doesn't take much effort to scroll past for people who have no interest in it.

i don't necessarily want to see everyone else's twitter posts either. some people i already follow on twitter itself and i don't need to see it twice. some people are incredibly spammy. i wish everyone cut, and in fact the last holdout on my d-roll finally got the message. i don't use CSS tricks because i do want to see some, not all, and i generally feel that people should cut stuff that's for their own archiving purposes.

but yeah, if loudtwitter could do a better job of presentation, that might make it even somewhat interesting for others. though since twitter itself sucks at that, i'm not blaming the LT guy for it.