I like embedded tweets, and yes I can still discuss the content

[boston bean]

just like I can a link to a gif or jpeg or to a newspaper article. Hell twitter embeds often come from wapo/times/politico, etc. Learn how to navigate them.

If you aren't using twitter, you should be. Because it is the absolute best news aggregator site, that you tailor to your own likings.

And lots of opinion writers are posting on twitter. It keeps you up to date.

People are posting news that is also breaking on twitter, and it is usually there first. So, go with the flow is my best advice.

[AuntPatsy]

1. I agree with you though I refuse to become a part of the twitter revolution

there will always be haters

[ProfessorGAC]

2. I Have An Account. . .

. . .but i don't care for Twitter. That being said, i think the biggest complaint about them can be addressed by copying & pasting the tweet in the body of the post for people looking in from systems that block Twitter.

I can see the tweets themselves, so it's not for me, but most of the complaints seem to be about not having any way to know what the tweet is even about, because it doesn't display for them.

[CurtEastPoint]

4. You read my mind. Here is the best way, IMHO, to do this to make everyone happy!

[NCTraveler]

24. Excellent illustration. nt.

[CurtEastPoint]

25. Why, Thank You!

[octoberlib]

3. Thank you. Activists, organizers and protestors also use it to communicate things to

the general public that may not be being reported on in the news. I love it.

[Cha]

5. I'm not on Twitter yet but I love the new embedded tweets

with pics too.. What's not to like?

Link to tweet

[get the red out]

6. I like them also

I have just started using twitter since the election, and I also find it to be a wonderful tool for getting news and information quickly.

[Orrex]

7. Would you like them if you couldn't click on any of them?

If you had no way to know that you were opening an effectively worthless OP until you'd already opened it?

I can't think of a single reason why Link to tweet posts shouldn't be housed in a Twitter subforum, or else the subject lines auto-tagged in some why so that DUers can identify them at a glance.

[boston bean]

8. Fix your computer so you see the embed. Not sure what else to say.

If other people can allow their computer to see them, well... do the same. No sense in making it so others can't use and enjoy the functionality.

[JustAnotherGen]

14. Many of us work in large corporations

And the company network does not allow social network access. . It's not just twitter that is blocked - but Facebook, instagram etc. etc.

I don't know the size/scope of your employer - but if you are at a 'mother ship' you can't just call up Sally in IT and ask her to change your settings.

It doesn't work that way.

[Denzil_DC]

17. Not wishing to sound brutal, but how do they feel about your browsing DU at work? n/t

[Orrex]

28. Not sure that that's any of your concern, honestly

But I'd say that the matter is between the employer and the employee.

[Denzil_DC]

29. No, it's not any skin off my nose.

Except you and others are browsing at work and complaining about problems doing so here.

[Orrex]

35. Your nose notwithstanding, it's a matter of basic functionlity

It would be very helpful if DU either collected these posts into a dedicated forum a la Video & Multimedia or else auto-tagged the subject line to identify the post as a twitter link.

That way the user could know which posts are unreadable without having to click on them.

[Denzil_DC]

37. I'd be dead set against a separate forum for them.

I suspect I'm not going to be alone about that, but you could always post your suggestion on "Ask the Administrators."

See my post below where I explain a bit more about where I'm coming from on this and what other tech solutions might be, if the admins can spare the time and if the coding necessary is possible.

[Orrex]

47. Yeah, to that end, you & I are basically on the same page

If the subject lines can be visibly tagged as twitter posts, then there'd be no need for a separate forum, I agree.

DU etiquette already encourages people to include (nt) or (eom) when posting subject lines without a subject body, so this feels to me like the same kind of thing. I wouldn't require DU to auto-tag (nt) message, of course, but IMO identifying the twitter posts would greatly boost functionality for everyone.

[JustAnotherGen]

36. It's fine - it's a news aggregator

Especially the foreign policy stuff.

Aside from that - the company wifi - used on personal devices - blocks it too. So to save data - I lock onto that to listen to my tunes, check market watch, etc. etc.

I have an IEC/HS/Hazmat Focus - so I need to keep my eyes and ears on developing legislation and international disputes.

Just your friend Conflict Minerals Resolution rep weighing in!

A funny - they block FR - it falls under st*rm f*on* type of site.

[Denzil_DC]

40. Any employer that blocks those sites is worth working for!

Though it's maybe disturbing they find that's necessary ...

[JustAnotherGen]

45. Ha!

So true!

We heard it at DU first that the Trump admin was considering placing the thawed Cuba Relationship on the ice block again. I'm in the middle of an export there. Literally at the mid way point of the delivery.

Sometimes it's easier to come here than it is to going through my 35 RSS feed email searches.

[Denzil_DC]

49. Sounds to me like you have a good case for asking your employer for

some way to allow you full access to that social media functionality.

You also make a good case for making, certainly the more world-changing tweets more accessible, though if it's that important, I imagine it would hit LBN from a more conventional source.

I guess some stuff might even break on FR etc., which could be an excuse for some of your co-workers ...

[Orrex]

27. No one's asking them not to enjoy the functionality

Instead, I'm pointing out that there's no credible reason not to enable others to see the information.

This doesn't have to be on the poster's end, either; DU could auto-format the subject line to tag it as a Link to tweet post, or presumably auto-fill the message with the text of the tweet.

You can enjoy the functionality of embedded YouTube videos simply by posting the URL. I don't see why this enjoyable functionality can't be extended to the Link to tweet posts.

[boston bean]

30. Because it is your computer that isn't allowing the embed. It isn't DU or Twitter.

[OriginalGeek]

38. I think we can all be happy with just copying the text of the tweet

in the post as suggested above.

I like being able to follow someone right from the post here but I can certainly understand how frustrating it is for people who get blocked by their work networks and only see "link to tweet" and nothing else.

[boston bean]

42. I am not happy with that, because first it is difficult to copy and past text from a tweet.

Especially from a phone.

It is much more efficient and easier to link to the tweet and see the embed.

Thirdly, I like to read the comments on some tweets and an embed makes that very easy.

So.. Sorry... I'm going with what technology allows and makes easier. It's not DU or other people making it not work. it's peoples own computers that are set up in a way to not allow the embed.

Why should people have to give up the functionality because of others security setting on their PC or phone.

[OriginalGeek]

50. first, I am not arguing we should take away this functionality

But you post how you want. You have valid point - it IS a little more difficult to copy and paste but I demonstrated below it's not a LOT more difficult. All you do on your phone is long press on the tweet and your phone will copy it to your clipboard. Paste that in a reply on DU. Go back and copy the link to the tweet from the drop down box and paste that in the same reply.

Most phones allow task switching and you DO have to go back and forth twice but if you are posting the link to DU you have already done on e of the copies.

All Orrex is saying is he can't help it if his work blocks twitter. It isn't his computer's bad set-up - it's his work network stopping that traffic. That's not your fault either and nobody is saying it is. All I'm saying is if you want the most people available to participate in your posts, make them readable by the most people possible.

[boston bean]

51. Might work better if people weren't calling DU a twitter wasteland, or something to that effect.

Seems more than just an issue of their employers security settings....

[OriginalGeek]

53. well yeah

but that's a separate issue.

DU added some functionality and not everybody is up on the tech yet so change is weird and can upset people but eventually that will all die down.

In the meantime, until we are all posting from our brain embedded tweeter chips and everyone sees everything in 3D holograms it doesn't hurt very much to help along the people who can't participate fully by adding text to our tweet posts.

[OriginalGeek]

48. Testing copy paste

1-202-224-3121 CALL YOUR SENATORS TO MAKE SURE THEY VOTE NO FOR: #SESSIONS

Link to tweet

Not too difficult but if it's more than you want to do I'm not here to make you post in any way you don't want to.

[Denzil_DC]

58. The thing is,

if one of us posts an embedded tweet and for whatever reason (e.g. time, forgetfulness, laziness) doesn't include a text version, there's nothing stopping anyone who can't access them asking if the OP or somebody else could post a text version.

That already happens with videos etc., where folks who can't view them may ask for the gist or a transcript. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that if I saw a request like that, I'd happily help out if I had the time and the tweet was textual or had an image that could be copied and pasted (not all can).

We're talking about etiquette. It's very hard to enforce that, so now many of us are aware it's an issue for some folks, we're going to have to rely on people observing it. But given the other, sometimes annoying, breaches of etiquette I see on here every day, I don't hold out any hope for 100% compliance!

The alternative is a tech fix by the admins as I've suggested may be possible elsewhere. I'm no coder, so I don't know how difficult or practical (a) offering account options to display embedded textual tweets as text might be, or (b) not displaying them at all, just the link (that second option probably wouldn't be hard to code, but might not be a solution for most of those having issues).

[lillypaddle]

10. " ... that you were opening an effectively wothless OP"

happens every time someone posts an Onion OP and doesn't identify it as satire in the header.

[Denzil_DC]

15. Orrex, you said on another thread that workplace filters stopped you seeing embedded tweets.

You've popped up on every recent thread about this, making the same complaints.

I haven't been blunt before, but I don't see why I should censor my online experience because you choose to browse DU from your workplace!

[Orrex]

26. Because no one's asking you to censor your online experience in any way

I'm not entirely sure that retweeting someone else's idea really qualifies as "an experience," but even if it does, why not contribute and make it more worthwhile to a broader readership?


Is there some function that prevents DU's twitterfans from actually quoting the 140 characters?

[boston bean]

31. They are doing that. It is your computer that is not allowing the complete embed and instead

you see it as "link to tweet".

People aren't typing in "link to tweet".

[Orrex]

33. Um. Oh.

Well, that's on me. [font size=1]Never mind.[/font]

[boston bean]

39. You think people are doing that just to piss people off, huh? LOL

it's your machine... It isn't what they posted! LOL oh, glad we could clear that up at least!

[Orrex]

46. Well, probably not specifically to piss them off...

I figured that Link to tweet was an artifact of the process, sure, but that posters were also failing to include the actual tweet.

You're the first one to spell this out, and I don't see how the difference might otherwise have been discernible to non-twitterers.


Regardless, I maintain that it's kind of lame simply to post a tweet without adding anything to it, but YMMV.

[Denzil_DC]

34. Time and convenience would be one issue.

Some graphics and moving images can't be isolated and posted.

I've said before that if time allows, I for one will do my best to post textual content as well as a tweet link (that's what I used to have to do, and it took a while for each tweet to format it in a way that made some sense).

On EarlG's announcement thread, I've already gone out of my way to try to help others who've got issues with the display of tweets come up with their own constructive personal solutions: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10138150

But the complaints have been broader than that, like "DU is turning into a big Twitter link," for instance.

Maybe this is something the complainers could run by admin - there may be some coding option that could be developed that would give star members the account option of not displaying tweets. There might even be a way of coding that could give members the option of automatically displaying tweet text, rather than an embedded tweet, but I've no idea how complex that might be.

[herding cats]

55. I believe it was via a conversation with you the other day I realized this was an issue.

I don't link tweets as much as some, due to it not being an option on my Apple mobile devices, but I do link to article snips I read on Twitter somewhat often. After realizing these were blocked for several people the other day I changed the way I format my posts. I now type out the pertinent text I'm referencing in the image. For example: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028604731

Twitter is, for me, an excellent news aggregator, but when I post here it's to share what I think might be important with others, or discuss what I'm reading for added clarity. Which means I want as many people as possible to be able to see what I'm posting. I appreciate your making me aware that some couldn't.

[Orrex]

57. Thanks--that's quite helpful. boston bean also helped clarify the issue for me.

I thought that what I was seeing was what the users were posting: a copied hyperlink that I can't click. She explained that this is how my system parses the tweet because my company's filters block them. Makes sense, and I don't think I'd otherwise have been able to realize that without her cluing me in.

[lillypaddle]

9. Agree nt

[LanternWaste]

11. At worst, they're something I simply ignore

At worst, they're something I simply ignore as I'm not on Twitter. But as it's becoming a quasi-valid mechanism for communication, I'll sometimes click on the link to see what's going on. I doubt I'll ever be an active user, but that's on me.

I'll certainly never whine about the links though... I admit my vanity is far too great to let myself appear so cranky and belligerent about something so small.

[Denzil_DC]

12. Twitter's great for a number of things.

It's one of my main ways of keeping tabs on what's going on nowadays, though I refuse to start an account myself. I've built up a large resource of folks I generally trust who'll point me at articles etc. I wouldn't otherwise find.

It's particularly good for breaking news or local reports that might not hit the MSM. But obviously, like any other source, you have to exercise caution and check out the veracity of anything before passing it on (or pass it on with a strct warning that it may not check out).

And among all the froth and gibber and misinformation and hate speak, there are some seriously devastatingly witty people out there. I'll never apologize for sharing their material here if I think others may enjoy it.

[JustAnotherGen]

13. My work network blocks it

And they will continue to do so.

I can't read / link to the tweet - be it wired or wifi on a device (handheld/tablets) in the building so I'm locked out of the discussion.

The poster up above who took the time to show the 'screen grab'(???) that's helpful.

If it's just a link - I trash the whole thread and move on.

I just signed up last week via my tablet at home - I'm very hidden and put it to a dark web email. I've no need to be verified or tracked / followed by people. I'm just there to follow a few IRL friends who are trolling the fuck out of Spicer, Trump, Ryan, Conway, etc. etc. Like VILE.

Too bad and nasty and not p.c. enough to post even a high level at DU. But it makes me laugh!

[boston bean]

16. People are posting a link that embeds. Some people see the embed others may see

Link to tweet.

It isn't something the poster is doing. It is the device the viewer uses that isn't allowing the embed to b seen and instead posting "link to tweet".

[riverwalker]

18. It's like crack for news junkies

Twitter is incredible. Instantaneous reports of breaking stories, sometimes an hour ahead of cable news and wire services. Enables real time interactions with politicians, journalists and activists around the world. Has anonymity which Facebook doesn't. I absolutely love Twitter.

[Denzil_DC]

20. Yup. It can also give you some interesting insights into the mentality of journalists, etc. n/t

[yuiyoshida]

23. I DO too...

[Gothmog]

19. I also like embedded tweets

[Lucinda]

21. Yep.Me too!

[NCTraveler]

22. They don't seem to bother me.

I would like if some of them had a little more content in the ops. Most do. It's just some. That said, I don't find clicking on an op and then backing out quickly due to lack of content to be some kind of personal affront to me. It's not a part of my struggle. lol.

[frogmarch]

32. I like embedded tweets too, and

even though I don't have a Twitter account myself, I go there every day, where I read certain other people's tweets, especially those by politicians and activists.

[malchickiwick]

41. No Twitter, no Trump. I hold the platform responsible for the fall of western civilization.

So, no; I will NOT be jumping on that bandwagon any time soon.

[snooper2]

43. Twitter is just another contributor to the dumb-ing down of America

First about 10-15 years ago we have millennials contribute to their own idiocy by texting "new" words in their own language -

Because so cute but also so lazy...who needs to type compete words K!

Like- so perf V FOMO! About a year ago we had a new young lady at our work who would actually use that crap in email chains, she didn't last long of course.


Now we have twitter being used by the leader of the free World. Who is an absolute fucking idiot and the stupid masses eat it up. Fucking amazing....

FDR would be proud of us-

[boston bean]

44. Actually Twitter has kept me well informed.

I'm not using it to see Britney Spears latest dysfunctional thought.

I follow news papers, their journalists, political blogs, news media.

And some of it is insightful tweets, other times it includes links to articles or data that educate you.

So, no it is not dumbing people down. In fact it is doing the opposite.

[Denzil_DC]

54. Exactly.

I use it extensively for all that.

Like everything else, it's a tool. It has downsides (like Trump, though how else would we get such confirmation of what an unspeakable idiot he is?) and upsides, and it's up to us to make use of it productively if we wish.

Having said that, there's some very funny content on there as well, and I sure can use a laugh wherever I find it nowadays.

[boston bean]

56. Funny, sarcastic wit are all a big plus!!!

[MineralMan]

52. I don't use Twitter. I don't visit Twitter.

I don't mind embedded Tweets at all. I sometimes open threads like that, read what someone tweeted and, if I'm interested, I read down the thread. That's what I do with every thread I open. If I'm not interested, I back up to the GD thread list and choose another thread to read.

Since I work at home, I have no blocks on anything, so those embedded tweets show up as intended. If I did work at a place that blocked social media sites, I would take that as a message that the company didn't want me frittering my work time away on social media sites. That would not have anything to do with how I felt about DU, though.

DU is what it is. If there are things I can't view on DU for some reason, I won't complain about it. I'll just click the back button on a thread if I can't see what's in there. I tend to do that with most threads that link to something but don't include content written by the poster that comments on what is linked. I usually move on to another thread immediately.

Same thing with context-free posts about what someone just saw on their TV screen. Most of the time, I'm out of that thread as fast as I got into it. Sometimes, I comment about adding some information to make the thread more useful, but that's it.

I control my DU experience. I read what I choose and ignore what I choose. The problem is not with DU or people who post on DU. The problem is with me if I don't simply back out of threads that are not useful to me. DU is what DU is. I use it because it's useful to me, on the whole. If it were not, I'd go somewhere else for my news and discussions.

I'm sorry that some people work at places that restrict their access to the Internet in some way. In general, I think that sucks, but some companies seem to think that forcing people not to do things is acceptable. Maybe they've found that too many people are spending time on social media to the detriment of the work they're being paid for. I don't know, but I chose to work for myself decades ago so I could make my own decisions about how I spend my time. That decision sometimes cost me a lot of money in lost income during slow periods, but it was my choice.

I love DU. I don't necessarily love every thread on DU. So it goes...