egafd.com

My criticism, as I've said many times, is the limited length of the Tweet. They '140 characters' thing means you have a lot less scope to say what you want to say. That is what makes the Tweet have less point to it than if you had a lot more room. I've said this many times before. The debates on here could not be had if we only had room for 2 sentences - I could not write all this for example, it would be very hard to shorten all I want to say down to 140 characters.

People can think my longer posts on here are equally as pointless as a Tweet (just longer), or they can think a 140 character monologue has more point to it than one of my longer writings. It's up to them. I remember in the early days of texting on your mobile there was very little room and everyone used to abbreviate things like mad. The phone companies then started giving everyone a lot more room to write texts. Everyone liked, and still likes, that much better. Maybe they will do the same with Twitter one day (or rather "may they do sem wiv Twtr 1day").

[quote]My criticism, as I've said many times, is the limited length of the Tweet. They '140 characters' thing means you have a lot less scope to say what you want to say. That is what makes the Tweet have less point to it than if you had a lot more room. I've said this many times before. The debates on here could not be had if we only had room for 2 sentences - I could not write all this for example, it would be very hard to shorten all I want to say down to 140 characters.[/quote]

Firstly, your grammar in that paragraph is awful and you may be wise to keep your posts to 140 characters in future. Secondly, I wasn't talking about twitter's limits but the pointlessness of tweets compared to your posts. You could say that given the 140 character limit there is actually more 'point' because you have to get straight to it, where as a longer post is more likely to go off topic and become full of hyperbole and irrelevant nonsense (and yes, I include my own sometimes long-winded posts in that!).

I've said this before and I'll say it again: just because YOU don't find twitter useful doesn't mean others don't. People still drive cars when they could all do much more with transit vans. People still text when it's much easier to talk over the phone. People have one night stands when long term relationships offer much more to a person. People keep cats when dogs are far more useful. People listen to the radio when TVs provides more information for our senses to pick up on. People still prefer 2D films when 3D films are the same price. Simple 3 and 4 chord songs have dominated the charts for years when complicated classical pieces have always been around. I could go on and on. Twitter is simple, quick and doesn't require the level of effort and interaction that users of Facebook usually expect from their friends and family. It's easy sex without the hassle of a relationship, if you like. But I've told you this before and you still haven't 'got it', despite the simple analogies and the obviousness of it all. In short, you're a bit fucking dense.

At least Rosie-Jones is actually using Twitter to communicate with anyone who's interested in what she has to say, which is a far sight more than what you seem to use it for, you dumpling.

I've read every word of what you've written. I think we'll just have to disagree on this. You continue liking Twitter, and I'll continue disliking it.

Samuel L Jackson is a great actor and possibly the world's coolest dood. It's interesting how his career only took off later in life, most people have a sucessful career from an earlier stage.

It's not about agreeing or disagreeing. It's about your inability to see the obvious or realize how you're contradicting yourself in the points: "I think twitter is pointless.......but I use it for seeing pictures."

That tells me everything.

Have you ever had your views changed by a debate on here, Max?

It's interesting how his career only took off later in life, most people have a sucessful career from an earlier stage

Apparently...and this is a big apparently he had issues with substance abuse for 15 years. if this is true then he came out the other side very well where many dont make it

If this is true then its his life experience that has made him the man he is today. How many people can you say were in so m any iconic movies from Goodfellas to Star Wars (in Good Fellas he played a brief part as Stax before Pesci popped him in the back of the head)

The man is a marvel beyond his acting career. I noticed he is Nick Fury in the recent Marvel films Avengers and Iron Man as well

Has his own golf course in Scotland apparently. I wonder if he plays with Sean Connery

I'm sure I've had my opinions changed after engaging in debates on here about certain subjects. I will say again, as I've said many times, the limited room one has for writing messages on Twitter is not a good thing.