@Sean P. Precisely my thoughts. Just a simple "retweet_of_status_id" field on a status update will allow users to post their own thoughts (a.k.a. "keeping the conversation moving") and it would allow client apps to display/link original message however they like. Then readers have all the context they need and if they're interested they can view/ interact with the original tweet as they like.
This may seem like a trivial thing to get this excited about, but twitter is all about the conversation and the power of social media is the two-way communication. So why would we want a feature that squelches the conversation and confuses sharing? On Aug 13, 3:10 pm, "Sean P." <seantpa...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with janole. I believe the simple "Reply" concept would be > best in this regard. For example, if I had a tweet that I found, > regardless of who its from, I can retweet it, but link together the > original tweet in the same manner that we do for the replies. Thus, we > create a chain of where a retweeted message came from but also allows > us to make comments. Heck, with this direction, you can blow away the > original tweet in your tweet and insert a full 140-character comment > and with the chain, Twitter can go back to the last tweet in the chain > that isn't linked and we can assume this is the original message and > display the original above the user's tweet in the timeline, in a > similar fashion of how message boards and forums work. > > On Aug 13, 2:31 pm, janole <s...@mobileways.de> wrote: > > > > > Will it be possible to "comment" on the retweeted tweet? If not, > > people might just continue to use the current "RT ..." convention. > > > Retweeting can be a way of acknowledging a tweet or disapproving a > > tweet etc. > > > If you search for "RT" in search.twitter.com you'll see a lot of > > commented retweets. > > > Ole > > > -- > > @janole / mobileways.de / Gravity
