I see this pattern so often and it gives me vicarious irritation: 1) person tweets about [whatever] 2) someone else replies in agreement, and does so by explaining OP's point back to OP it's not totally clear how often #2 is intentional but DON't DO thAT if you can help it
-
Show this thread
-
I am not talking about a "let's see if I understand you correctly" kinda thing. it's like OP: "I love that flamingos are pink because of their diet!" reply: "The flamingo is a charming creature! Flamingos have pink feathers due to the small aquatic creatures they eat"
5 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Flamingos example maybe not the best =/ I think the pattern here is actually: 1) OP says something that *implies* background knowledge (e.g. dietary habits of flamingos) 2) someone replies with that background knowledge, as if OP weren't aware MADDENING
9 replies 0 retweets 20 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @sonyasupposedly
I think both you and the person I'm subtweeting now need to get over it. You should read people's comments to you in a kind and favorable light, and be encouraged that they thought so much of what you had to say that they wanted to say something to you as well.
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @random_eddie
> You should read people's comments to you in a kind and favorable light there are two different things going on here — I think the vast majority of these people have positive intent / are benign, but they are still fucking annoying and I don't want to deal with them
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @sonyasupposedly
Fair point. Consider whose perspective you're best able to change, though. Yours, or the world's?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
DON'T LISTEN TO HIM SONYA !!! it is right and proper to rage against the retarded billions, and wrong to change yourself to accept their inanities
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.