![]() |
|
Twitter, et al
OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the
attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not indulge. I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect strangers. -- The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name. |
Twitter, et al
"hk" wrote in message m... OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not indulge. I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect strangers. -- The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name. Lots of that going on around here. |
Twitter, et al
On Apr 20, 4:52*pm, hk wrote:
OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not indulge. I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect strangers. -- The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name. Try googling "why do people tweet", moron. Or are you just trying to stir **** as usual? |
Twitter, et al
On 4/21/2010 9:11 AM, Loogypicker wrote:
On Apr 20, 4:52 pm, wrote: OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not indulge. I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect strangers. -- The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name. Try googling "why do people tweet", moron. Or are you just trying to stir **** as usual? Don't encourage him. Would you want Krause tweeting with your daughter or your grand daughter? |
Twitter, et al
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:52:10 -0400, hk
wrote: OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not indulge. I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect strangers. Tweeting is realtime info. You can follow fave celebs, talking heads, savants or whomever and know their thoughts without the filter of the media apparatus. It's text broadcast. Texting or instant messaging is point to point which is good for getting a hold of people no matter where they are. I can IM with a collegue when I'm in a meeting or on the phone. Quite efficient, actually. Not so interested in the tweet thing but IM and texting are good tools. Excellent if you want to stay in touch with your teen kids while they're out in the world. |
Twitter, et al
On 4/21/10 2:47 PM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:52:10 -0400, wrote: OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not indulge. I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect strangers. Tweeting is realtime info. You can follow fave celebs, talking heads, savants or whomever and know their thoughts without the filter of the media apparatus. It's text broadcast. Texting or instant messaging is point to point which is good for getting a hold of people no matter where they are. I can IM with a collegue when I'm in a meeting or on the phone. Quite efficient, actually. Not so interested in the tweet thing but IM and texting are good tools. Excellent if you want to stay in touch with your teen kids while they're out in the world. "Follow fave celebs" Uh, well, if I saw Penelope Cruz walking down K Street, I'd follow her just to watch that... but follow her on a cell phone? Not so much. :) I'm not sure why I'd want to follow every utterance of a talking head, a savant, or whomever. I do understand the occasional Instant Message. Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of messages each day. -- The Tea Party's teabaggers are just the Republican base by another name. |
Twitter, et al
On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:37:09 -0400, hk wrote:
On 4/21/10 2:47 PM, jps wrote: On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:52:10 -0400, wrote: OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not indulge. I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect strangers. Tweeting is realtime info. You can follow fave celebs, talking heads, savants or whomever and know their thoughts without the filter of the media apparatus. It's text broadcast. Texting or instant messaging is point to point which is good for getting a hold of people no matter where they are. I can IM with a collegue when I'm in a meeting or on the phone. Quite efficient, actually. Not so interested in the tweet thing but IM and texting are good tools. Excellent if you want to stay in touch with your teen kids while they're out in the world. "Follow fave celebs" Uh, well, if I saw Penelope Cruz walking down K Street, I'd follow her just to watch that... but follow her on a cell phone? Not so much. :) I'm not sure why I'd want to follow every utterance of a talking head, a savant, or whomever. I do understand the occasional Instant Message. Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of messages each day. My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life. New form of communication and language. |
Twitter, et al
"jps" wrote in message
... On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:37:09 -0400, hk wrote: On 4/21/10 2:47 PM, jps wrote: On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:52:10 -0400, wrote: OK...I'm an old fogey, so, someone who isn't, please explain the attraction of tweeting, instant messaging, et cetera, to those who do not indulge. I'm not talking about those who use the medium to exchange the occasional bit of info, such as "got home from school safely," or "Hi, Grandma!", but those who apparently spend a good part of the day sending or receiving hundreds of messages to their friends, relatives, and even perfect strangers. Tweeting is realtime info. You can follow fave celebs, talking heads, savants or whomever and know their thoughts without the filter of the media apparatus. It's text broadcast. Texting or instant messaging is point to point which is good for getting a hold of people no matter where they are. I can IM with a collegue when I'm in a meeting or on the phone. Quite efficient, actually. Not so interested in the tweet thing but IM and texting are good tools. Excellent if you want to stay in touch with your teen kids while they're out in the world. "Follow fave celebs" Uh, well, if I saw Penelope Cruz walking down K Street, I'd follow her just to watch that... but follow her on a cell phone? Not so much. :) I'm not sure why I'd want to follow every utterance of a talking head, a savant, or whomever. I do understand the occasional Instant Message. Note that I was discussing those who send or receive hundreds of messages each day. My kids can send and receive hundreds of messages in a week. For them, it's like conversing on the phone but it can take place over hours. Responses are as available so it fits into an active life. New form of communication and language. Now preserved for ever in the Smithsonian I believe. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Twitter, et al
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:37 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com