I think the extra meta data the retweet API brings is a good addition.
Currently you have to use up
some of your 140 chars for the retweet heading + username (Rt
@whoever ...). So
you might get stuck having to truncate the original tweet. With the retweet API
you no longer need to include that in
With the current way RT works (without the RT API) and at least as of
a month ago, making RTs a reply makes it limited to people who follow
both the sender and the original author (since it's a reply). This
greatly diminishes the point of retweeting and was the reason why I
stopped
Boy, this concerns me. People definitely need to be able to add their
own comments to the RT.
And removing the retweets if someone deletes the original tweet?! No
way. Once it's retweeted, that retweet belongs to the retweeter and
must stay. I think it violates social media principles to delete
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 12:50 PM, Neicole neic...@trustneicole.com wrote:
Boy, this concerns me. People definitely need to be able to add their
own comments to the RT.
No they don't. If they want to comment on it, let them write a comment
and post an URL to the original message.
If you could
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:59 AM, Joseph Cheek jos...@cheek.com wrote:
what? Every time my app submits a tweet with the reply id set, that
limits the people who can see it?
Were you not around for The Great @Reply Upheaval of 2009?
ouch! deleting tweet IDs in my messages ASAP...
As long
Now does this deletion occur recursively including retweets of retweets?
Let's say Bob retweets John and Mike retweets Bob's retweets. Will
Both John and Mike retweets
be deleted if John original tweet is deleted or just Bob retweet?
I'm not sure I like the idea of the delete of retweets if the
I definitely do not like the fact the a deletion of a tweet also
deletes the retweets. It means someone else's actions can subtract
content from my time line and completely negate an action that I
performed on my account, namely a retweet.
To be very honest, I think Twitter is oiling a wheel
b) Completely agree
c) I thought the reason for even implementing this despite the fact that
most 3rd party clients already handle retweets by creation of a new tweet,
was to allow text that's being sent by 100's 1000's and so on to be stored
in a single location to save on database space as well
I think that's the point. They can always just do a manual retweet of a
tweet. People aren't given the undo button for rumors and leaked info in
real life, but we're not in real life :D
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:21 PM, Cameron Kaiser spec...@floodgap.comwrote:
If the original retweet is
I think that's the point. They can always just do a manual retweet of a
tweet.
Of course. That brings us back to the whole question of what purpose the new
retweet system serves if the old manual system will still suffice ;-)
--
personal:
If the original retweet is deleted its retweets will also disappear.
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 3:56 PM, Dewald Pretorius dpr...@gmail.com wrote:
With the new retweeting, what happens with retweets if the original
tweet is deleted, or the author's account is closed or suspended?
Do all the
If the original retweet is deleted its retweets will also disappear.
I don't know if I like that. Yes, it might save the original tweeter some
embarrassment, but sometimes it's useful to make a tweet survive. Imagine a
political gaffe that could be withdrawn instantly and everything that
12 matches
Mail list logo
