Instead of having to rely on userscripts, DW could give users the option to:
-collapse (or cut) loudtwitter -collapse the content in posts that are over X number of characters - maybe not collapse ALL the content, but just those than go over the limit - so people aren't forced to scroll for multiple screens. That way if people *are* interested, they click the expand and read without reloading and without blocking the actual content - and since they opted into it, I don't see how it could be regarded as censorship >_> g On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:58:46 -0700, Wahiaronkwas David <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't agree with forcing cuts on people, for largely teh same > reasons Rachel Lee Cherry has given. > > I don't agree with having an automatic blocking of Twitter built in in > Dreamwidth. I don't like Twitter, but I dislike censorship even less. > If Automatic implies the DW will block it for you - that they will > take it ut of your hands and cover your eyes for you. I don't think > that's going to happen. > > The best you can hope for, my guess is, a userscript that will hide > twitter posts for you. One that works with Opera, Safari, Firefox. I > hope you can find someone to write that. _______________________________________________ dw-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dwscoalition.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dw-discuss
