this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2024
1990 points (99.6% liked)

People Twitter

5396 readers
627 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
1990
Stuck in the middle with you (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
299 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Is it incorrect?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

In the sense that I don't believe the people described exist in any significant quantity, yes.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago (2 children)

there is no statement there so I don't know what you mean by "incorrect". all i see is someone who doesn't know how people use tldr.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Or someone who knows very well people use tldr to skip reading the post and you are annoyed that he caught you being that lazy.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

valuing my time isn't lazy. if you can't summarize your post you're probably shit at writing and the article is not worth the time in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

not trying to be combative, but this grumpy response over a 5min read does illustrate something and i hope its trolling tbh. the tldr summary that is triggering here is kinda a key point of the article - people looking for a quick interaction and then moving on.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

this is what i mean by shit at writing.

this fails to be the point of the article unless the article is suggesting people are moving on to quick interactions because they are deliberately being moved away from longer articles by the authors that suggest these articles aren't worth their time... is the point of the article that longer content is belligerent and condescending?

I don't think it's actually getting any point across. it's just a boomer who thinks no one has anything better to do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Was it too long for you and you didn't read it?

In that case ....This blog post is not for you.

That's what the question mark does. It marks a question.

RTFA? RTFA!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

I didn't read it because the tldr is retarded.