Lol, I don't get why unsubscribing - or scrolling - have to be our only  
two options. As an opt-in feature, people who would rather not see  
loudtwitter can have them cut - just as with img placeholders. So people  
who post loudtwitter don't have *anything* forced onto them. It would just  
mean more options for people.

But I really, really want a minimise/collapse button so I don't have to  
beg people to 'cut, plz' everytime someone posts something insanely  
long/very graphic.

-g

On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 10:16:52 -0700, chasy <[email protected]> wrote:

> I guess my mode of operation is, "if I don't like it, I don't read it." I
> don't really agree that people's entries should be forced behind a cut  
> just
> because *I* don't want to read it. I have friends who use LoudTwitter  
> (yes,
> it drives me crazy too, because my thought is, if I'm interested in what  
> you
> have to say on Twitter, I will follow you), who post about the specific
> details of their sex life, who share a YouTube video almost every day,  
> etc.
> --> but if I don't want that stuff on my reading page, that's on *me*,  
> not
> them. Either I unsubscribe, put up and shut up (as gossymer so eloquently
> put it *wink*), or simply SKIP it.
>
> I don't understand why this--^  isn't an acceptable option. It's not that
> inconvenient to scroll past the "offending" entry.
>
> - Chasy.


_______________________________________________
dw-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss

Reply via email to