5 ms·

Because rather than retweeting "I hate the KKK" you just retweeted "I support the KKK".

Spivak 6y ago
I mean it's not an insurmountable problem though. As long as likes and RTs are tied to a specific version of a Tweet and you can see the edits and associated likes it's fine.
- kristiandupont 6y ago
  Even setting aside the UX issues in this, I think this is underestimating the complexity. I don't know anything about Twitters infrastructure but obviously we are not talking about a single postgres instance here. Effectively turning every tweet into a linked list with connected retweets, likes etc. is a significant data model change for a system of this scale.
  - reidjs 6y ago
    For now let's just add a "*" to the original post to give all the retweeters deniability. I'd bet 99% of edits are for grammar/spelling/readability.
- user-the-name 6y ago
  That just makes it even more confusing. So you edit your tweet, but all the people who retweeted are still showing the wrong version and you can't do anything about it. It kind of makes the situation worse than it is now.
  - davidivadavid 6y ago
    It's not the "wrong" version. It's the original version, as per when they quoted it. There's really no other way it could work. When you quote someone, you repeat what they said, not what they might repeat some time in the future. When you quote a book, you write down what's written in the book. Not what the author writes in the next edition. You may in time edit/remove/amend your tweet to comment on further changes.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nefitty 6y ago
This is a particularly low-tier way to troll on Reddit. It doesn’t seem like the problem is drastic there, or even here on HN. I think the problem does stem from a retweet having a vibe of “I endorse this message.”, regardless of what the retweeter has written in their bio.
- JoshTriplett 6y ago
  > I think the problem does stem from a retweet having a vibe of “I endorse this message.”, regardless of what the retweeter has written in their bio. At the very least, a retweet always means "I want more people to see this message".
  - siruva07 6y ago
    Since Twitter has effectively moved the default away from chronological order, what is really the purpose of a retweet? An upvote is naturally a positive interaction for “suggested tweets my followers should see”
    - JoshTriplett 6y ago
      Retweets still convey a tweet to your followers much more directly than a "like" does.
- saagarjha 6y ago
  I see it occasionally on both platforms, but not very much. Usually it gets caught very quickly.
davidivadavid 6y ago
So keep the original message when you retweet. That doesn't seem like an insurmountable amount of conceptual complexity.
- user-the-name 6y ago
  That just makes the feature weird and broken.
  - davidivadavid 6y ago
    How?

I mean it's not an insurmountable problem though. As long as likes and RTs are tied to a specific version of a Tweet and you can see the edits and associated likes it's fine.

kristiandupont 6y ago
Even setting aside the UX issues in this, I think this is underestimating the complexity. I don't know anything about Twitters infrastructure but obviously we are not talking about a single postgres instance here. Effectively turning every tweet into a linked list with connected retweets, likes etc. is a significant data model change for a system of this scale.
- reidjs 6y ago
  For now let's just add a "*" to the original post to give all the retweeters deniability. I'd bet 99% of edits are for grammar/spelling/readability.
user-the-name 6y ago
That just makes it even more confusing. So you edit your tweet, but all the people who retweeted are still showing the wrong version and you can't do anything about it. It kind of makes the situation worse than it is now.
- davidivadavid 6y ago
  It's not the "wrong" version. It's the original version, as per when they quoted it. There's really no other way it could work. When you quote someone, you repeat what they said, not what they might repeat some time in the future. When you quote a book, you write down what's written in the book. Not what the author writes in the next edition. You may in time edit/remove/amend your tweet to comment on further changes.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

nefitty 6y ago

This is a particularly low-tier way to troll on Reddit. It doesn’t seem like the problem is drastic there, or even here on HN. I think the problem does stem from a retweet having a vibe of “I endorse this message.”, regardless of what the retweeter has written in their bio.

JoshTriplett 6y ago
> I think the problem does stem from a retweet having a vibe of “I endorse this message.”, regardless of what the retweeter has written in their bio. At the very least, a retweet always means "I want more people to see this message".
- siruva07 6y ago
  Since Twitter has effectively moved the default away from chronological order, what is really the purpose of a retweet? An upvote is naturally a positive interaction for “suggested tweets my followers should see”
  - JoshTriplett 6y ago
    Retweets still convey a tweet to your followers much more directly than a "like" does.
saagarjha 6y ago
I see it occasionally on both platforms, but not very much. Usually it gets caught very quickly.

davidivadavid 6y ago

So keep the original message when you retweet. That doesn't seem like an insurmountable amount of conceptual complexity.

user-the-name 6y ago
That just makes the feature weird and broken.
- davidivadavid 6y ago
  How?