Loading Profile...
Customize RT format
On Tweetie, retweets are posted like "tweet (via @user1) (via @user2)". Would be great if you can re-format it. See some examples:
"RT $1 $tweet (via $2)"
"RT $1 RT $2 $tweet"
"$tweet (RT $1 via $2)"
Well, I don't matter the formatting structure :)
"RT $1 $tweet (via $2)"
"RT $1 RT $2 $tweet"
"$tweet (RT $1 via $2)"
Well, I don't matter the formatting structure :)
I’m happy
38
people like this idea
I like this idea!
Tell me when this idea gets some attention.
The more people who like this idea, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who like this idea, the more it gets noticed.
The best points from everyone
-
"RT @username" does not equal "via @username"
A retweet is the direct quote of another Twitterer.
A via is necessary if I've written my own content regarding a link or idea, but the link or idea was discovered via another Twitterer.
This works the same way in the blogosphere. There is the "blockquote" and the "via".
3 people think
this is one of the best points
-
I'm surprised at all the high level debate missing the obvious here- twitter is about less than 140 chars and "(via )" is 4, "RT" is 2. Done. I will not buy this software if it does not allow me to choose, I need the extra 2 chars often enough that is is important to me. My .02, maybe I am not your intended customer, that's fine, there are other clients out there (though not as visually stunning, tho as twitter grows that may change quickly too)
I’m frustrated
4 people think
this is one of the best points
-
We had this discussion in another comment thread, but I still don't see any practical difference between using the RT prefix or the "via" suffix... The way the re-tweet is *presented* is not going to change the behaviour of chronic re-tweeters, since most just hit the repost button and the post button one after the other and pay no more attention than that.
What forcing the "via" suffix *does* do is makes the resulting re-tweets far less readable and intuitive than they may otherwise be.
Supporting one format without supporting the other is pointless and is not actually helping the problem. I see many annoying and pointless re-tweets with a "via" suffix, with the difference being that it's far less obvious that these are re-tweets, and therefore makes reading the timeline even more confusing.
3 people think
this is one of the best points
-
I prefer RT @user as well for two reasons: a) it's shorter and b) you know immediately that it's a retweet when reading it.
4 people think
this is one of the best points
-
I think the developer keeps trying to push people to use something other than RT because he personally doesn't like the RT format. I bought both Tweetie for iPhone and Tweetie for Mac. Although I don't often retweet, I'm disappointed that the developer keeps trying to push people to use his way when clearly people have shown in the past (With the iPhone client, how it seems like unwillingly added RT support after much pressure and demand) that many prefer the RT format.
I’m disappointed
5 people think
this is one of the best points
-
Yep. RT @username is the standard. Let's follow it with Tweetie, too.
I’m dissappointed
4 people think
this is one of the best points
-
I would just be happy for the "normal" RT Support. I want the RT @USERNAME instead of the via at the end.
I’m frustrated
6 people think
this is one of the best points
Create a customer community for your own organization
Plans starting at $19/month
-
Inappropriate?I would just be happy for the "normal" RT Support. I want the RT @USERNAME instead of the via at the end.
I’m frustrated
6 people think
this is one of the best points
1 Comment Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
You're right, and people will feel freedom when they can choose the way retweets are posted. -
Inappropriate?Agreed. It'll be added to the preferences soon enough. I don't see "via" anywhere else. At the very least "via" should be at the beginning so others know that we're not the author.
I love Tweetie for Mac, though. Others prefer other programs, but it's worth buying just for the look, IMO. Plus, this is only version 1.01 Comment Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
What's the attention span of the average twitter person, then? You are confused like hell for what, like 110(!) characters, thinking a guy likes women's shoes and already jump out the window before the "via" clears everything up? Holy cow, this RT nonsense makes me even more confused at the state of mankind than the MMS-craving on iPhone. Mankind WANTS to go down the drain, it seems... My opinion.
-
1 person thinks
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?Yep. RT @username is the standard. Let's follow it with Tweetie, too.
I’m dissappointed
4 people think
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?Loren, I know you don't like "RT @originalposter original message" and I've read your blog post, but just like on the iPhone, you should include the option since Twitter users use it alot.
I’m hopeful
2 people think
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?Absolutely, the current retweet format makes the tweet show up as a message, so it doesn't get included into people's feeds unless they have "Show messages" turned on. Defeats the purpose of retweeting.1 Comment Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
The purpose of retweeting is useless noise. Just post GRAGRAGRAGRAGRAGRAGRAGRA, if enough people do that for long enough you'll rule the trends like no Kutcher could... Sorry for bitterness... Am tired and confused...
-
Inappropriate?I think the developer keeps trying to push people to use something other than RT because he personally doesn't like the RT format. I bought both Tweetie for iPhone and Tweetie for Mac. Although I don't often retweet, I'm disappointed that the developer keeps trying to push people to use his way when clearly people have shown in the past (With the iPhone client, how it seems like unwillingly added RT support after much pressure and demand) that many prefer the RT format.
I’m disappointed
5 people think
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?I prefer RT @user as well for two reasons: a) it's shorter and b) you know immediately that it's a retweet when reading it.
4 people think
this is one of the best points
5 Comments Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
You would know immediately it's a retweet by having seen that particular tweet millions of times already. Use quotation marks if you wanna know something's been said by somebody else and don't *unnecessarily* quote *all* and *always*. You people start to turn Twitter into a noisebath and do so happily. I don't get it. It's the way things go I guess...
-
Not if you don't follow the original poster or anyone who's yet retweeted that. If you don't like RTs, unfollow the retweeter. You've no right to complain if you choose to follow the person.
-
I'm complaining about what's going on in the trend search: Ever been there? I have a right to complain, cos it does not have to be that way! It's one thing to link to valuable content and once in a while quote someone. It's another reading Vader's newest joke for the upteenth time, wading through garbage.
-
I RT news items, blogs that have unusual insights, quotes that I appreciate. That's why I want the format in Tweetie.
No, I don't spend any time in trend search, and don't think that Tweetie will have any influence on what is or is not seen there. -
What people en masse contribute has big influence. And people tend to just hit RT on *everything* nowadays. I'm not saying it's you who's to blame. It's who you're allying yourself to here. The I want RT *Masses*
-
Inappropriate?Interesting comments here...
When I see a great comment or link to site that I like, I attribute it as I would in my articles and books. That's what a "retweet" does: it says I learned this from this friend. I think that's honorable and appropriate, and, in fact, I think that not doing so is unethical.
I am sure that folks who don't like retweets won't follow me for long, but that's OK with me. However, retweet format is effectively defacto standard and Tweetie should follow it, regardless of the personal bias of the developer.
Until it does, I can't use it; I don't want to take the time to reformat every retweet I make.
I’m disappointed
1 person thinks
this is one of the best points
13 Comments Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
I still stand on the position as Loren and Gruber: Link to the content. Don't make the trending topics a pool of regurgitation. It's this that the friends of RT don't want to see: The thing they like is a *bad* thing. They just grew so accustomed to it, it hurts. Oh, it's like MS Products then. De facto standards. And you saying: Let's NEVER change that. Makes me shake my head, really...
-
If the wording really is so instantly amazing, put it in quotation marks... But most of RTs are just lazy noise.
-
Ironic that most Twitter analysis indicates RTs are a GOOD thing. Sorry, I strongly disagree with your assessment, but it's your right to have it.
I appreciate when people attribute my statements. I attribute others' statements. This is journalistic integrity. If you don't like it, this is likely not a medium for you. -
And I for one find it a good thing that Loren fights these windmills. It's just so sad, all... (I'm mindblowingly exaggerating of course, but still: It's the many little stinking pieces that constitute a larger pile of sheer excrements).
-
Clearly, you follow a different set of people than I do. I've said my peace.
-
I don't like your getting personal on my ability to cope with journalism. Please point me to the analysis you are referring to. I disagree with that but would have to see the actual data, not somebody claiming it on an internet forum bundled with a hidden insult on my integrity.
-
Example: RT @guykawasaki: Video of perhaps the best speech I've given: The Art of the Start for TIE *link* <- great talk!
Why not Write: Great talk by @guykawasaki: The Art of the Start for TIE *link* ? -
A journalist *must* attribute a quote or reference. There is no question about this. I happen to be a journalist, so this is very important to me. Microblogging or not, I approach it the same way. It didn't have anything to do with you or your approach at all, only with mine.
An example of Twitter analysis: http://twitalyzer.com/
There are others, but that one was open in my browser. Certainly, when I RT people, I receive thanks from them, so they appreciate it. I often have my RTs RTed, as well, so at least some receiving them appreciate them, too. So, I'm OK with it.
As I said earlier, do what you like, but for an application to enforce a very strange format is silly. I've gone back to an app that gives me the freedom to do what I want.
BTW, Tweetie doesn't resolve your issue, anyway. It just does the thing you don't like in a non-standard way. -
You seem to misunderstand what I mean: It's not the linking and quoting *per se* that bugs me, it's the sheepishness that is reached once it gets so lazy and massive amounts of unchanged quotes flood the intertubes... Please consider what I mean.
-
The correct quote is this: "RT @guykawasaki: how to avoid deceptive SEO experts http://adjix.com/c7pg See also: http://seo.alltop.com/ < -RIGHT FREAKIN' ON!"
I thought it appropriate to attribute it to Guy, since he wrote the original statement and pointed me to the content. People may read that and decide to follow Guy (I often find new people to follow based on others' retweeting of them). I don't want to claim that as original discovery. That's why.
You may not agree, but I feel it very strongly and promise that I won't be changing it. -
I took an older quote.
Again, this is not about what you do. You could do that with something other than RT. You seem to believe in standards, while I see content and @mention as key. It would be all a hell of a lot nicer, if people spent just a few seconds longer mentioning valuable things thinking about something to add to that, and maybe just link to the original tweet. -
You know about the "in reply to" function twitter has? Oftentimes you could just hit reply on Guy K. and write in your own tweet: Amazing what you wrote there about this and that. And people would find it, and there would be something MORE than just a copy.
AND (sorry for caps) IT WOULD STILL BE CONTRIBUTED TO GUY! -
@DonSqueak
Yes. But if you just want to quote something interesting, retweeting is better. It's less work—it's a page load away on Twitter, and few clients are as user friendly as Tweetie in in_reply_to. And if you're just giving a raw quote, adding to it only removes from it. If it's worth being a standalone quote it stands on it's own, without anything added to it. You can also RT to get attention to a topic. Such RT's would be about things like the various internet blackouts there have been recently. -
Inappropriate?Having the RT note at the beginning is essential. It makes me read the tweet in quote voice, rather than talk voice.
I’m not hungry anymore.
2 Comments Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
What's wrong with "quotation marks"?
-
Depends on usage. It just looks clumsy if there's quotation marks already in there.
RT @Someone: Some random quote: "I think I made a quote."
or
RT @someone: Some random "quote".
is better than
'Some random quote: "I think I made a quote."' (via @someone)
or
'Some random "quote".' (via @someone)
It's also about conventions. If I wrote one of the latter two, I'd think that @someone had written the quotation marks in their tweet. -
Inappropriate?This is a software product - you can love or hate RTs, but since people use it, the option must be present.
Please don't turn a FEATURE discussion into an argument about Twitter etiquette - this isn't the place for it.
I’m glaring
1 person thinks
this is one of the best points
3 Comments Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
Wrong thinking. This is *exactly* the place for it. Because programming is also about philosophy. You are suggesting blackmailing the programmer, by saying: If you don't give me that feature, we *all* leave here.
Ever wondered why Apple is so successful about stuff? Because they don't listen to every feature request. And have the guts to sell a one button trackpad until tech is ready to not need two buttons. Meanwhile clunky PC laptops will always have two buttons, because now there's no way back from that. -
This comment was removed on 04/21/09.
see the change log -
Unfortunately, when the developer seems to be taking a stance on whether a feature is added on the *basis* of Twitter etiquette, it's important to get to the root of the discussion.
There are many who feel that re-tweeting is a bad thing. Fine. I'm not sure I disagree to be honest. However, I still don't see how the choice of re-tweet syntax and formatting does anything to prevent the chronic retweeting problem that some users will exhibit. Users who habitually retweet a lot of junk are unlikely to care whether it starts with RT or ends with "via."
On the other hand, it seems that those of us who have to *see* that stuff would much rather see the "RT" prefix, as it makes it more obvious what you're looking at. You can visually (and even programmatically) filter these out if you don't want to deal with them. -
Inappropriate?You know about the "in reply to" function twitter has? Oftentimes you could just hit reply on the original contributor and write in your own tweet: Amazing what you wrote there about this and that. And people would find it, and there would be something MORE than just a copy.
And it would still be contributed to the original author!
I’m unsure why C&P is all there is today.
-
Inappropriate?We had this discussion in another comment thread, but I still don't see any practical difference between using the RT prefix or the "via" suffix... The way the re-tweet is *presented* is not going to change the behaviour of chronic re-tweeters, since most just hit the repost button and the post button one after the other and pay no more attention than that.
What forcing the "via" suffix *does* do is makes the resulting re-tweets far less readable and intuitive than they may otherwise be.
Supporting one format without supporting the other is pointless and is not actually helping the problem. I see many annoying and pointless re-tweets with a "via" suffix, with the difference being that it's far less obvious that these are re-tweets, and therefore makes reading the timeline even more confusing.
3 people think
this is one of the best points
3 Comments Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
This is still true. I'm more against the feature in itself. But the waves are gonna force Loren to write RT options into this anyway. I mean look at the outrage...
-
Well, the point I'm making above is that the RT option is *there* -- we're arguing semantics about how re-tweets are *formatted*
Ironically, I think there would have been less outrage if the feature had just been left out. Twitterific doesn't offer a retweet option *at all* and I don't see too many complaints about it.
I think the general feeling in here is that if you're going to support the feature, it should be supported in the manner that's the most commonly used -- particularly when the current political stance of using the "via" suffix is really a non-solution to the greater problem of RT-spam. -
I agree with you on everything, really. The only good thing about "via" in my opinion is when it's *not* implemented as it is here: just as a way to say where something is from.
I'm more than sad that people don't seem to value their originality more and lack the belief that their followers would want to see what somebody you mention has originally written. Why would one have to word for word repeat what Guy Kawasaki wrote when one could just as well point the followers to his tweet? It's a double-click away on Tweetie! How much more value would there be, if Twitter would not degenerate into a copy and paste waste-bin?
...
I need to sleep. -
Inappropriate?I'm surprised at all the high level debate missing the obvious here- twitter is about less than 140 chars and "(via )" is 4, "RT" is 2. Done. I will not buy this software if it does not allow me to choose, I need the extra 2 chars often enough that is is important to me. My .02, maybe I am not your intended customer, that's fine, there are other clients out there (though not as visually stunning, tho as twitter grows that may change quickly too)
I’m frustrated
4 people think
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?The behaviour that I see on twitter is RT + username used for tweets where you don't edit the text and via + username for tweets where you edit the text.
2 people think
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?The (via @name) as far as I can tell is used by no one. Regardless of how you feel personally a product should be designed to be as useful as possible for as many people as possible.
I’m frustrated with some of atebits' stubbornness
1 person thinks
this is one of the best points
2 Comments Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
It's used by lots of people! @gruber, @buzz, @ashponders, @atebits and so forth. But more importantly it's used judiciously by them.
-
For the record, I use (via @)
-
Inappropriate?DonSqueak: RT and via each has a specific meaning. RT is for retweeting -- republishing the original message with no comment. Via is for adding your own commentary while giving credit to the source. Each approach has its place, and trying to convince people that one is "good" and the other is "bad" ignores those contexts.
I have yet to see a convincing argument why one is inherently better; most arguments come off as people just trying to force their own preferences on others.
I'm hoping Tweetie adds support for both approaches, as both are useful. -
Inappropriate?Tweetie really should include support for the "standard" RT syntax. "Via" has another meaning, more or less meaning "this is the source to my own tweet" rather than RT, which is "hey, I really liked this specific tweet"
OK, fine, the developer seems to not like this. But the user base does.
1 person thinks
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?I understand the behavioural discussion around the use of RT or via, but seriously, it is not the job of a software developer to be the behavioural police of the users of their software. That's just weird!!
I prefer the RT syntax, and calling them "Retweets" not "Reposts".
I understand the objections to potential abuse, but I don't abuse it AND the RT at the beginning is the more commonly accepted form. So I vote for it!
(PS. I bought the software! So I'm a paid-up user.)
I’m frustrated
-
-
-
Inappropriate?I don't quite see the point of $2 here. Can someone enlighten me?
-
-
Inappropriate?I want this too. I find it totally stupid that because the designer of Tweetie doesn't like it he doesn't support it.
I’m frustrated
-
Inappropriate?"RT @username" does not equal "via @username"
A retweet is the direct quote of another Twitterer.
A via is necessary if I've written my own content regarding a link or idea, but the link or idea was discovered via another Twitterer.
This works the same way in the blogosphere. There is the "blockquote" and the "via".
3 people think
this is one of the best points
-
Inappropriate?My preferred format for retweeting is a simple "'original tweet' -@source" style. One of the (few) things I prefer about Twhirl right now (though not enough to get me back to using it instead of Tweetie) is the ability to customize the Retweet format.
Besides, allowing for customization would let everyone set their retweets up however they like, and keep the discussions of the 'correct' way to do it on Twitter instead of in your support threads. ;)
-
Inappropriate?So we don't get a choice because the designer is forcing us to use "via"? That sucks. How about you just put in a preference to the app and let the users decide?6 Comments Add a comment
This is one of the best points
-
There is now a preference - check the latest version of Tweetie for Mac.
-
How about for the iphone?
-
Yes the iPhone version has had it since before Tweetie for Mac even was announced. Settings are in the Settings app.
-
Thanks for the info. I cannot find the "settings app". I don't see any place for settings in the application on my iphone. Is there a FAQ or somewhere to find this information?
---
Ok I found the settings app. Is this under "experimental"? -
For some reason he called the setting "RT-gurgitationability" under experimental.
-
Thank you so much for your help.
-
