People Twitter

5264 readers

1585 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a tweet or similar
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

2008

Stuck in the middle with you (lemmy.world)

submitted 3 weeks ago by The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

300 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

TL;DR? Why not just go watch another five second video of a kitten with its head in a toilet roll, or a 140 character description of a meal your friend just stuffed in their mouth. "nom nom". This blog post is not for you.

wow, this some next level obnoxious boomer shit.

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Is it incorrect?

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 1 points 3 weeks ago

In the sense that I don't believe the people described exist in any significant quantity, yes.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

there is no statement there so I don't know what you mean by "incorrect". all i see is someone who doesn't know how people use tldr.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Or someone who knows very well people use tldr to skip reading the post and you are annoyed that he caught you being that lazy.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

valuing my time isn't lazy. if you can't summarize your post you're probably shit at writing and the article is not worth the time in the first place.

[–] lightsblinken@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

not trying to be combative, but this grumpy response over a 5min read does illustrate something and i hope its trolling tbh. the tldr summary that is triggering here is kinda a key point of the article - people looking for a quick interaction and then moving on.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago

this is what i mean by shit at writing.

this fails to be the point of the article unless the article is suggesting people are moving on to quick interactions because they are deliberately being moved away from longer articles by the authors that suggest these articles aren't worth their time... is the point of the article that longer content is belligerent and condescending?

I don't think it's actually getting any point across. it's just a boomer who thinks no one has anything better to do.

[–] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Was it too long for you and you didn't read it?

In that case ....This blog post is not for you.

That's what the question mark does. It marks a question.

RTFA? RTFA!

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago

I didn't read it because the tldr is retarded.

[–] DerHaseWillSchmako@feddit.org 1 points 3 weeks ago

If you are offended by this, then you obviously didn't read the article.

[–] LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 3 weeks ago

The definition of cringe, gramps needs 70ccs of sensory content, stat