I think it's a pretty pissy thing for al3x (<a href="http://twitter.com/al3x/status/1786897274" rel="nofollow">http://twitter.com/al3x/status/1786897274</a>) to publicly denounce a controversial feature change like that... at least wait until the backlash is over! He needs to support his company's decisions, instead of being so eager to divert blame from himself.<p>Although my comment could be completely void if Techcrunch is overplaying the entire situation, which <i>is</i> probably the case...
It amazes me how <i>upset</i> and <i>involved</i> people are in an obscure option of a microblogging service. People who are so upset really need to get some freakin' perspective.<p>But what amuses me most is when commentators on the subject say the new system is convoluted. <i>Both</i> systems were convoluted and weird. The new mechanism is just as weird as the old one was. Every website's features are just gentle wrappers around their underlying architecture. When you look at them carefully you can see the system underneath, and that system is complicated no matter what you do.
This article is pure gossip rag stuff, but at the same time it gives a nice timeline of events for those of us too busy to follow every little feature-change brouhaha. I wouldn't want to see too many articles in this style, but this particular one is ok, imho.
<p><pre><code> "Users will pick up on this waffling, smell blood and go in for the kill."</code></pre>
Not everyone is as adversarial as a TechCrunch author. (though I like Siegler's coverage there)
I don't get it... I don't even have an option to turn off/on @replies to people I don't follow... I just see them all.<p>I've NEVER had an option to turn off @replies... is this only a thing for users who've signed up recently?
Does something like Twitter really warrant this sort of response? I mean, if my power goes out, or my internet, or anything like that, I'd be reasonably upset with the utility company, but this is a free service. I don't use Twitter so I'm a poor judge of its value.