The majority of this article is history telling, told through the lens of one persons particular narrative, cutting that history up into conveniently sized chap

The majority of this article is history telling, told through the lens of one persons particular narrative, cutting that history up into conveniently sized chapters (1.0, 2.0, etc). Then the article shifts gears to the authors own transition to living in a new place, adapting to that change, and then describing the now as a bifurcated existence (real life proximal, and through the invisible network society/work). The second part would have stood on its own fine and didn’t need the “history as I see it” preamble. I don’t know why authorship on the net, in this bifurcated space, has to choose between tweets and long form. It’s ok to write a longer-than-a-tweet developed point.