# Why is the site allowing constant twitter posting



## Levo-Lon (15 Dec 2019)

Maybe a block on these random tweets would be a good idea.
Certain members spend all day posting this tripe..

If you have an opinion, fine, but do we need to keep seeing none members rants on twitter here?


Maybe we need a poll on what we can post via other social media..

Just a thought, it might actually stop certain posters pedalling their agendas.


----------



## Slick (15 Dec 2019)

Hit ignore. 👍


----------



## slowmotion (15 Dec 2019)

Twitterrhoea certainly seems to have laid a few people low since the start of the election campaign. I hope it doesn't last for long.


----------



## Levo-Lon (15 Dec 2019)

Slick said:


> Hit ignore. 👍




I've already got lots of threads on ignore, wont be many left in a bit


----------



## Unkraut (15 Dec 2019)

Isn't it true that twitter only takes in 20% of the population? To echo Bismarck, twitter is not public opinion. Those using twitter tend to gather people of similar opinion who, in agreeing with them, enable the illusion that 'everybody thinks like this'. 

Some tweets, especially on the eternal Brexit thread, can be interesting, but excessive reference to this perhaps ought to be discouraged without being outright banned. How's that for good old British compromise?


----------



## Seevio (15 Dec 2019)

My adblocker blocks twitter so all I see is a load of people posting who have nothing to say.


----------



## Gunk (15 Dec 2019)

I don’t see a Twitter feed, but I do use an Ad Blocker


----------



## Pale Rider (16 Dec 2019)

Seevio said:


> My adblocker blocks twitter so all I see is a load of people posting who have nothing to say.



My adblocker doesn't block twitter so all I see is a load of people posting who have nothing to say.


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Dec 2019)

Glad its not just me who's sick of it. 

@Pale Rider . Top answer


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> Maybe a block on these random tweets would be a good idea.
> Certain members spend all day posting this tripe..
> 
> If you have an opinion, fine, but do we need to keep seeing none members rants on twitter here?
> ...


I dunno, I disagree with you about some things so I tried to have a discussion with you. You told me I was wrong for having an opinion which I don't even hold and then flounced from the thread. So as someone who posts a fair few twitter links which I find interesting, if I am 'peddling an agenda' or even just expressing an opinion, which you say is 'fine', then I'm obviously doing it really badly as you certainly haven't understood it and are anyway unwilling to engage.


----------



## AndyRM (16 Dec 2019)

While we're at it, can we ban links to The Sun, Daily Mail and The Express? I don't much care for the lies and nonsense on those sites.


----------



## Adam4868 (16 Dec 2019)

I would have thought if you don't like like it don't read it ? Or just put someone on ignore ? I don't really care either way.I don't block anyone,doesn't bother me.


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 Dec 2019)

CC is the only place where I see any twitter. It doesn’t bother me, sometimes it amusing and informative. You don’t have to read it. Same with links to the Wail, Sun, the guardian etc.
What’s important is that it offers something of value to the debate in hand....


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2019)

It doesn’t bother me - like most of the stuff on social media, there’s good things, there’s bad things, there’s things I agree with and things I don’t agree with. If people don’t like something, best thing is to ignore it.

Let’s not forget, just because someone posts their own thoughts, it doesn’t necessarily make them more valid, reliable or relevant than a link to a Tweet.


----------



## Cycleops (16 Dec 2019)

Fab Foodie said:


> What’s important is that it offers something of value to the debate in hand....


Don't think I've ever seen one which has done that. Why can't the poster share his own thoughts directly rather than channel them through some twit on Twitter?


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2019)

Cycleops said:


> Don't think I've ever seen one which has done that. Why can't the poster share his own thoughts directly rather than channel them through some twit on Twitter?


I’d be happy to refer you to a few helpful, informative tweets......but I suspect in doing that you’d feel I was compounding the problem.

Twitter is no different in quality to CC or FB. There’s some stunning stuff from well informed commentators and there’s dross.


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

Cycleops said:


> Don't think I've ever seen one which has done that. Why can't the poster share his own thoughts directly rather than channel them through some twit on Twitter?


Not everybody perceives and processes particular forms of language and communication in the same way.

Your pronouns are off, btw.


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

AndyRM said:


> While we're at it, can we ban links to The Sun, Daily Mail and The Express? I don't much care for the lies and nonsense on those sites.


They all harvest twitter for their stories anyway.


----------



## Cycleops (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> Your pronouns are off, btw.


Bit like your Twitter quotes then


----------



## Inertia (16 Dec 2019)

Cycleops said:


> Don't think I've ever seen one which has done that. Why can't the poster share his own thoughts directly rather than channel them through some twit on Twitter?





Cycleops said:


> No need to thank f*uk just his stylist.
> As one Twitter user commented after his confident performance on BBC1’s _Question Time_ on Friday evening, it is a very skilled individual who has “turned the Corbyn look from a freight train-jumping hobo into a vaguely credible-looking adult”.


If I’m reading this right, the op doesn’t like Twitter so wants it banned across the whole forum rather than ignore it themselves?. I’ve heard hiding in a fridge works.


----------



## derrick (16 Dec 2019)

Cycleops said:


> Don't think I've ever seen one which has done that. Why can't the poster share his own thoughts directly rather than channel them through some twit on Twitter?


I always thought it was Twats on Twitter.


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2019)

derrick said:


> I always thought it was Twats on Twitter.


I think you are reading the wrong tweets. Try following:

Chris Boardman
Cervelo
Geraint Thomas
Mark Cavendish
Robert G Macfarlane
Jim Al Khalili
Brian Cox

That’s a start. I’m happy to give you more names if you’d like.


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

I'm impressed that we've so far shown massive restraint in not just bombarding this thread with a mass of 'OK Boomer' tweets.


----------



## derrick (16 Dec 2019)

Brompton Bruce said:


> I think you are reading the wrong tweets. Try following:
> 
> Chris Boardman
> Cervelo
> ...


Sorry i just do not do twitter.


----------



## BoldonLad (16 Dec 2019)

Brompton Bruce said:


> It doesn’t bother me - like most of the stuff on social media, there’s good things, there’s bad things, there’s things I agree with and things I don’t agree with. If people don’t like something, best thing is to ignore it.
> 
> *Let’s not forget, just because someone posts their own thoughts, it doesn’t necessarily make them more valid, reliable or relevant than a link to a Tweet.*



If only everyone thought like that!


----------



## Electric_Andy (16 Dec 2019)

IMHO, twitter links come from the mouths of actual people, rather than news stories. So I think tweets are more "accurate" then a journalistic article from an online newspaper, where you might get quotes but largely it's the journalist who's interpreted it and written around it.

The root cause, if you can call it that, is not where the link is derived from, but it's the way in which people use links to validate their opinion. I have noticed that people _tend_ to give more credence to a tweet than they do from a DM link. But we are all free to do that from whichever source we choose. So if you ban one form of quoting/linking then you'd need to ban them all.

Nothing is stopping anyone from replying to a quoted Tweet and saying "I don't agree with that".


----------



## Fab Foodie (16 Dec 2019)

Cycleops said:


> Don't think I've ever seen one which has done that. Why can't the poster share his own thoughts directly rather than channel them through some twit on Twitter?


Maybe because the poster thinks the twit on twatter expresses a view or thought more succinctly. Also, you see who is making the comment in context and the tone employed. I don’t think it’s at epedemic proportions yet on CC.


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Dec 2019)

Well the twitter offenders have spoken


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> Well the twitter offenders have spoken


And have you listened and learnt?


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> I dunno, I disagree with you about some things so I tried to have a discussion with you. You told me I was wrong for having an opinion which I don't even hold and then flounced from the thread. So as someone who posts a fair few twitter links which I find interesting, if I am 'peddling an agenda' or even just expressing an opinion, which you say is 'fine', then I'm obviously doing it really badly as you certainly haven't understood it and are anyway unwilling to engage.




We dont agree on anything much.
Your a left winger, I'm not.


Inertia said:


> If I’m reading this right, the op doesn’t like Twitter so wants it banned across the whole forum rather than ignore it themselves?. I’ve heard hiding in a fridge works.




No your reading it wrong.
Ban is a bit harsh 

Merely a lot less, maybe 1-2 a day not constant..


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Dec 2019)

Cycleops said:


> Don't think I've ever seen one which has done that. Why can't the poster share his own thoughts directly rather than channel them through some twit on Twitter?




That really was my point...


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Dec 2019)

Brompton Bruce said:


> And have you listened and learnt?




Have you


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> That really was my point...




I dont think this site should be used as a political mouthpiece, just so we're clear. 

Especially as anything other than the minority view on here is instantly condemned..


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> Have you


I have - thanks, I've found the thread really informative. Thank you for starting it. As you'll know, I tend to post my own thoughts and rarely quote Twitter. I am on Twitter, though and find it provides some useful bits of information and entertainment. 

I already knew that CC has a diverse range of posters in terms of political standpoint, willingness to engage in a serious manner, experiences, demographics and willingness to help others. This thread has been like a microcosm of social media for highlighting that.


----------



## Inertia (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> No your reading it wrong.
> Ban is a bit harsh
> 
> Merely a lot less, maybe 1-2 a day not constant..


I think I read it right but I appreciate the clarification of what you meant. I disagree with a limit, especially as I feel it seems to.l be a reaction to one event. practically it’s probably a lot of work for questionable gains, either in programming effort or moderation time. 

The result would be people quoting tweets rather than a reduction in tweet info At least this way You can critique the source.


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> I dont think this site should be used as a political mouthpiece, just so we're clear.
> 
> Especially as anything other than the minority view on here is instantly condemned..


......and that is an entirely separate issue from the use of Twitter. It is also unlikely that a sub-forum called News and Current Affairs would ever be 'politics' free.

I'd also be careful about trying to censor minority views. That leads to a very unsavoury place.


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> I dont think this site should be used as a political mouthpiece, just so we're clear.
> 
> Especially as anything other than the minority view on here is instantly condemned..


I tried to discuss your views with you and you flounced. And I see you're still calling me a 'left-winger' which I'm not entirely sure I am. So 🤷‍♂️


----------



## Adam4868 (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> I tried to discuss your views with you and you flounced. And I see you're still calling me a 'left-winger' which I'm not entirely sure I am. So 🤷‍♂️


Left winger...what a horrible slur.Ive been banned of quite a few threads for less.


----------



## Jody (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> I'm impressed that we've so far shown massive restraint in not just bombarding this thread with a mass of 'OK Boomer' tweets.



I'd hope the members of CC would rise above that as 'OK Boomer' is such a pathetic retort.


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

Jody said:


> I'd hope the members of CC would rise above that as 'OK Boomer' is such a pathetic retort.


OK Boomer


----------



## Jody (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> OK Boomer


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

Adam4868 said:


> Left winger...what a horrible slur.Ive been banned of quite a few threads for less.


Personally I don't find political labels particularly helpful. Like Chris Rock said, there's some things I'm conservative about, some things I'm liberal about. Come to me with a specific policy or idea and I'll have a think about it, but I'm not going to accept or reject something just because it's been branded left or right wing.


----------



## Adam4868 (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> Personally I don't find political labels particularly helpful. Like Chris Rock said, there's some things I'm conservative about, some things I'm liberal about. Come to me with a specific policy or idea and I'll have a think about it, but I'm not going to accept or reject something just because it's been branded left or right wing.


I don't really care much either way,I don't take much offence to what anyone says on the internet.I might if it was said to my face....but I doubt it.


----------



## ColinJ (16 Dec 2019)

Gentlemen - you can't fight in here - _this is the war room Site Support!_


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Dec 2019)

Well we've nearly got to thread locked status, 


 beat me to it Colin


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

Adam4868 said:


> I don't really care much either way,I don't take much offence to what anyone says on the internet.I might if it was said to my face....but I doubt it.


I know. That's why I know I can give you a ragging sometimes and it's all good.

Or at least I hope it is...


----------



## Adam4868 (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> I know. That's why I know I can give you a ragging sometimes and it's all good.
> 
> Or at least I hope it is...


Did you say something ?


----------



## Jody (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> Personally I don't find political labels particularly helpful. Like Chris Rock said, there's some things I'm conservative about, some things I'm liberal about. Come to me with a specific policy or idea and I'll have a think about it, but I'm not going to accept or reject something just because it's been branded left or right wing.



I couldn't agree more with that Winjim. 


As for Twitter. Not sure it's a big issue posting links on the site. Is it due to their content?


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

ColinJ said:


> Gentlemen - you can't fight in here - _this is the war room Site Support!_


I prefer to see it as bickering rather than fighting.


----------



## Dogtrousers (16 Dec 2019)

I've only ever seen Twitter posts on here as useful. I generally only see it used for cycling team announcements, latest news, riders giving their insight or funnies on a particular race, or providing the insight/humour of commentators like Michael Hutchinson. Or sometimes for random funnies. All good.

For example in the Tour stage that was shortened due to landslides this year, the people in Wanty team car were posting pictures of the landslides before any of the TV pictures or other news was available.

I think it would be a retrograde step to ban them.


----------



## theclaud (16 Dec 2019)

Dogtrousers said:


> I've only ever seen Twitter posts on here as useful. I generally only see it used for cycling team announcements, latest news, riders giving their insight or funnies on a particular race, or providing the insight/humour of commentators like Michael Hutchinson. Or sometimes for random funnies. All good.
> 
> For example in the Tour stage that was shortened due to landslides this year, the people in Wanty team car were posting pictures of the landslides before any of the TV pictures or other news was available.
> 
> I think it would be a retrograde step to ban them.


This. Twitter moves quickly.


----------



## ColinJ (16 Dec 2019)

theclaud said:


> Twitter moves quickly.


It certainly does... I came back into Hebden Bridge once after a ride and the road I wanted to ride down had been shut by the police. I got home and checked for news and somebody had tweeted about it 10 minutes after the 'accident' had happened. (An idiot motorist had driven the wrong way into a one-way car park, slammed the car into reverse when confronted by a car going the right way, and backed over a child walking behind the car.)


----------



## ColinJ (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> I prefer to see it as bickering rather than fighting.


But... they were _fighting _not_ bickering_!


----------



## MontyVeda (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> *I dont think this site should be used as a political mouthpiece, just so we're clear.*
> 
> Especially as anything other than the minority view on here is instantly condemned..


Just stop following the political section of the forum... it's not hard.
As a utility cyclist, I'm not interested in cycling as a sport so I don't look at any of those forums.


----------



## mudsticks (16 Dec 2019)

meta lon said:


> Well the twitter offenders have spoken



Im not on twitter, so therefore would struggle to share anything from there.

However, I still find some shares informative, some dull, some funny, some downright depressing.

They're just other voices from elsewhere, variably well informed, but also offering other perspectives.

You can choose to ignore people, or whole threads, or not.

I find some ppls opinions on here, nothing short of offensive.

But I still find it useful to see them.

Just so I know what certain 'men in the street, on bicycles' are thinking.

It's enlightening to me.

The fact that some people will choose to put me on ignore, or ignore my points, however clearly, and politely they are made, is a bit annoying at times yes, but it's not something that is an outrageously unusual happenstance either.


----------



## Edwardoka (16 Dec 2019)

View: https://twitter.com/edwardo_ka/status/1206584888842956800


----------



## mudsticks (16 Dec 2019)

Edwardoka said:


> View: https://twitter.com/edwardo_ka/status/1206584888842956800




OK Edwarko... 


Spookily I had a convo with #2 son about the 'OK Boomer' expression, whilst planting salad just now. 

To be certain that the demographics were accurate, if it were to be used . 

I'm a gen-Xer so they can't touch me


----------



## Edwardoka (16 Dec 2019)

mudsticks said:


> OK Edwarko...
> 
> 
> Spookily I had a convo with #2 son about the 'OK Boomer' expression, whilst planting salad just now.
> ...


I fall in the gap between genX and Millennials and with a massively looming age milestone that I refuse to acknowledge. I think the disdain for boomers transcends generations.



mudsticks said:


> I find some ppls opinions on here, nothing short of offensive.
> 
> But I still find it useful to see them.
> 
> Just so I know what certain 'men in the street, on bicycles' are thinking.


Yes, I find it useful to listen to people that I am ideologically opposed to, so long as they're sincere.
Plurality of viewpoint and all that. Blocking just makes the filter bubble that much worse.


----------



## mudsticks (16 Dec 2019)

Edwardoka said:


> I fall in the gap between genX and Millennials and with a massively looming age milestone that I refuse to acknowledge. I think the disdain for boomers transcends generations.
> 
> 
> Yes, I find it useful to listen to people that I am ideologically opposed to, so long as they're sincere.
> Plurality of viewpoint and all that. Blocking just makes the filter bubble that much worse.



I even find the insincere points made, useful too, it all helps in building up a picture of the thoughts and feelings, and insecurities and anxieties perhaps, of one's fellow humans. 

Also you forgot to mention that posting tweets on forums makes you irresitably attractive to the opposite / same / all sexes*. 

*Delete according to your proclivities. 

It's one reason I had to stop doing it... 

Ps if it's forty don't stress, it's fine, if fifty it's finerer still


----------



## BoldonLad (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> Personally I don't find *political labels* particularly helpful. Like Chris Rock said, there's some things I'm conservative about, some things I'm liberal about. Come to me with a specific policy or idea and I'll have a think about it, but I'm not going to accept or reject something just because it's been branded left or right wing.



Ageist retorts aren't to helpful either.


----------



## mudsticks (16 Dec 2019)

The 'OK Boomer' thing isn't even ageist as such.

It's more a retort, to the comfily complacent 'when I were young' attitudes that can come out of the mouths of ppl in that demographic, particularly when those younger ppl speak of their concerns.

There's plenty of socially switched on 60/70/80/90 + yr olds oot there too.

Age is no excuse for ignorance.


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

mudsticks said:


> Pedalling pedant
> 
> The 'OK Boomer' thing isn't even ageist as such.
> 
> ...


See, this is what I mean by perception and processing of language. You've just written in four sentences what I felt I was expressing in four characters. But then I'm from whatever you call people born in the late 1970s. The last of the analogue kids.


----------



## mudsticks (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> See, this is what I mean by perception and processing of language. You've just written in four sentences what I felt I was expressing in four characters. But then I'm from whatever you call people born in the late 1970s. The last of the analogue kids.



You might be a gen x'er too @winjim . 

Will have to check my tables


----------



## winjim (16 Dec 2019)

mudsticks said:


> You might be a gen x'er too @winjim .
> 
> Will have to check my tables


I think according to some of them I might even be a millennial...


----------



## mudsticks (16 Dec 2019)

winjim said:


> I think according to some of them I might even be a millennial...



You whippersnapper you. 

Barely out of short trousers.. 

Anyhow - back to this evil twitter thingy


----------



## Edwardoka (16 Dec 2019)

mudsticks said:


> You whippersnapper you.
> 
> Barely out of short trousers..
> 
> Anyhow - back to this evil twitter thingy


It's the mods* I feel sorry for...


* moderators, not the boomer-era subculture


----------



## Blue Hills (16 Dec 2019)

Edwardoka said:


> Yes, I find it useful to listen to people that I am ideologically opposed to, so long as they're sincere.
> Plurality of viewpoint and all that. Blocking just makes the filter bubble that much worse.



Agree totally. The bubble is profoundly dangerous.
One reason amongst many i don't use fb _ have no wish to have some body smarming up to me, telling me what they think i want to hear so that they can use and possibly even afterwards snigger at me. Had a certain amount of that in offline life from snivelling creeps.
Have never blocked anyone (or reported a post) did recently find that i had acidentally blocked someone _ don't much like what I have seen of them but I lromptly unblocked them


----------



## Drago (16 Dec 2019)

I don't have a smartphone.

Many reasons I don't do Twibook. It's sad, pointless, a waste of human life and talent...I dont want to give my personal details to Mark Zuckerberg, and if I'm ever in trouble and make the news I don't want the Daily Mail stealing pictures of me fro Facebook.


----------



## Blue Hills (16 Dec 2019)

Someone on here did make the news and had the press trawling thro their fb.


----------



## Rocky (16 Dec 2019)

Drago said:


> I don't have a smartphone.
> 
> Many reasons I don't do Twibook. It's sad, pointless, a waste of human life and talent...I dont want to give my personal details to Mark Zuckerberg, and if I'm ever in trouble and make the news I don't want the Daily Mail stealing pictures of me fro Facebook.


But it's like anywhere - here on CC, Twitter, the pub, church, the local cycling club. There's informed chats, there's fun chats and there's rubbish chats. You have to pick the people you interact with and you have to think about what you post. You can choose to post dribble and hand out with pornbots or you can interact in a meaningful way with real people. When Mrs Bruce got cancer, she linked with another cancer sufferer on Twitter, shared stories and supported each other. They met in real life after their chemo and decided to write a book together on their experience of cancer. It's now a best seller on Amazon.

Social media doesn't have to involve a sad pointless waste of human life and talent.......


----------



## dodgy (16 Dec 2019)

What Twitter posts are we talking about? Is there a section of the forum I'm missing or something?


----------



## Ming the Merciless (16 Dec 2019)

Plus of course we have generation Z taking the piss out of the Millenials (who are Generation Y) and considered already past their prime.


----------



## mudsticks (16 Dec 2019)

Edwardoka said:


> It's the mods* I feel sorry for...
> 
> 
> * moderators, not the boomer-era subculture



Creep 



Brompton Bruce said:


> But it's like anywhere - here on CC, Twitter, the pub, church, the local cycling club. There's informed chats, there's fun chats and there's rubbish chats. You have to pick the people you interact with and you have to think about what you post. You can choose to post dribble and hand out with pornbots or you can interact in a meaningful way with real people. When Mrs Bruce got cancer, she linked with another cancer sufferer on Twitter, shared stories and supported each other. They met in real life after their chemo and decided to write a book together on their experience of cancer. It's now a best seller on Amazon.
> 
> Social media doesn't have to involve a sad pointless waste of human life and talent.......



Exactly, its like any other media, or resource, you take from it, and contribute as you see fit, as a discerning adult. 

You see all kinds of nonsense articles and statements for instance about how Instagram is all just trout pout selfies, and narcissistic, ripped young men, flexing. 

Which is nonsense, I follow hundreds of interesting individuals, and organisations on there, I've connected with loads of other ppl who share my interests. 

There's everything on there from politics, to pastry chefs, farmers, yogis, tree experts, embroideries, new music, colonial history, timber framers, you name it. Its there. 

And I've got hundreds of followers who are variously interested in what I do. 

I've made friends, and good contacts all around the world, found out about stuff I'd never have known was going on otherwise, and even gained new customers for my real life businesses from it. 

And promoted our small farm union. 

I also use it as a day to day, kind of diary, and notebook / memory aid - having been on there for about five years I can look back and check when I did stuff, pumpkin harvest, took a train to France, or whatever. 

I don't know why folks get so paranoid about it all - very few of us are that 'fascinating' to the authorities, nor so gullible to persuasion either


Unless yr doing something really dodgy, or are highly susceptible to being marketed at. 
I dont see the problem. 

Just pick and choose - it's not that hard


----------



## Levo-Lon (16 Dec 2019)

Brompton Bruce said:


> But it's like anywhere - here on CC, Twitter, the pub, church, the local cycling club. There's informed chats, there's fun chats and there's rubbish chats. You have to pick the people you interact with and you have to think about what you post. You can choose to post dribble and hand out with pornbots or you can interact in a meaningful way with real people. When Mrs Bruce got cancer, she linked with another cancer sufferer on Twitter, shared stories and supported each other. They met in real life after their chemo and decided to write a book together on their experience of cancer. It's now a best seller on Amazon.
> 
> Social media doesn't have to involve a sad pointless waste of human life and talent.......





Just so long as you agree of course  otherwise it becomes a cleverly disguised load of insults.
Your good with your words, I'll give you that, but it doesn't mean you right


----------



## AndyRM (16 Dec 2019)

I do love basking in the warm glow of a thread complaining about social media, on social media. It's been too long.


----------



## mudsticks (17 Dec 2019)

AndyRM said:


> I do love basking in the warm glow of a thread complaining about social media, on social media. It's been too long.



Well it is nearly Christmas, after all.

And where's our thread complaining about how Xmas is just waayyy too commercialised these days, and how we've forgotten its true meaning.

Not forgetting the horrors of the contraction *X*mas 

Nor, how some 'loony' left council has banned carols and is making everyone do 'Aum' chanting now instead...


----------



## SpokeyDokey (17 Dec 2019)

*Mod note:* thread now closed.

Linked Tweets are fine on the site provided that they are relevant to the thread, have some supporting text from the member making the post and are not used for trolling purposes.

There are no plans in place to ban them.


----------

