> > Speaking for TTYtter only, while I'll support receiving retweets, I am
> > unhappy with the API as it currently exists and retweets received will
> > be canonized into the older format (and retweets sent will be done
> > programmatically in the older fashion instead of through the retweet
> > methods). I suspect there are other app authors who will also do something
> > similar.
> I haven't looked closely at the RT API (it's not currently relevant to
> FishTwits, so I figure I'll let it stabilize before concerning myself
> with it), but would you mind sharing your issues with it, either here or
> off-list if you think that would be more appropriate?

It isn't the API methods per se, it's the fact that (as others have pointed
out) there is no way to edit or mark up a tweet using the Retweet system as
it is currently designed. This is important to me personally, and certainly
to anyone posting with #saveretweets. Also, as implied by the fact that I
won't be supporting it in its current form, it's easy enough to continue to
post in the old manner (or come up with a new one), which dilutes its alleged
advantages in trackability and ignorability, and I've always considered
it more important to know who is doing the retweet than who is being
retweeted, because who the filter is tells me as much if not more than what
is being filtered through them.

These are just complaints about the design of the system, although in fairness
to Ev, he has acknowledged some of the deficiencies and has implied they will
be fixed in later versions (cf. 


). But I won't be supporting posting through it in its current form.

------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- BOND THEME NOW PLAYING: "Thunderball" --------------------------------------

Reply via email to