NP just the murder of children but don't call it "weaponizing"....
Robert Mahnke
rpmahnke at gmail.com
Tue Jun 14 18:26:34 UTC 2022
"I don’t have any problem clicking on a url to bring up a tweet. That’s a
pretty rarified complaint IMHO."
I don't have any problem clicking on a url, but I resent a steady stream of
posts that are nothing more than links to tweets. If a tweet is interesting
enough to commend to someone else -- and many are -- then it's not too much
to ask for a line or two of text explaining why. Given the architecture of
the listserv, that's not too much to ask for.
By contrast, the architecture of Twitter is ideal for an account dedicated
to curating by retweeting selected tweets. In a former life, I created an
account for the neighborhood I lived in (@gloverpark) where all I did was
retweet other tweets that were relevant to the neighborhood. When I moved,
I passed the account to someone else who is still at it. But if that's what
you're going to do, do it it on Twitter. Like I said, I follow Mark on
Twitter.
Just my two cents. If everyone else likes getting those posts, I am happy
to be in the minority.
I am unable to understand your Cyrillic characters, but assume you are
referring to Thomas Eckhardt and are trying to impugn his views with them.
Since I just posted last week to point out that he was incorrectly
characterizing the NYT's coverage, you can assume I don't necessarily agree
with what he says. That said, this place would be much less interesting to
me if everyone here thought what I thought, so I would prefer that
disagreement be less ad hominem. That, too, is just my two cents.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 6:32 AM David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don’t have any problem clicking on a url to bring up a tweet. That’s a
> pretty rarified complaint IMHO.
>
> Re. “just the murder of children,” I think it’s a very valid response to *Мудак
> німецький гелікоптер*‘a attempt to downplay the horrific repeatedly
> disclosed fact of the RAMPANT *rape, torture and murder* of Ukrainian
> hostages (men, women and children) in towns occupied by Russia. That
> downplaying also included a “both sides do it” refrain, which is just pure
> CRAP.
>
> *Мудак німецький гелікоптер* has been a constant source of pure Russian
> propaganda, with a veneer of aloof superiority. If you feel he’s been
> treated unfairly here, fine. That’s your opinion. I think he’s been
> treated too nicely here. So there you go.
>
>
> David Morris
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 12:56 AM Robert Mahnke <rpmahnke at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Recognizing fully that it may not matter to you or change your posting
>> habits in any way, I find your emails to this list in which you share
>> tweets with a mere url almost totally useless. There is widely available,
>> well-designed software that enables you to share tweets. It is called
>> "Twitter." One can download the app, or use the open web version. I am
>> sure
>> you are familiar with it, because you have an account, @markkohut, which I
>> follow. When you share (or "retweet") someone else's tweet on Twitter, the
>> reader sees both that tweet and whatever text you may add with it. By
>> contrast, when you email tweets, I have to click on each tweet and open
>> another browser window (in Twitter!) to see whatever content you are
>> trying
>> to share.
>>
>> With regard to this post to which I am responding, you did not bother to
>> tweet the same content to your 1,330 followers, an indication that the
>> tweet itself was not that interesting, and that you are only sharing it
>> here as a response to Thomas Eckhardt's post about whether Russia was or
>> was not weaponizing rape. If I understand correctly, you don't argue with
>> the truth of what he shared, so you're trying to rebuke him for drawing a
>> distinction between rape as something that many soldiers do when given the
>> opportunity, and rape as a premeditated military strategy. You're trying
>> to
>> suggest that drawing the distinction somehow downplays the gravity of the
>> former. This post relates "just the murder of children" but not
>> "weaponizing," so Eckhardt must not really care about the murder of
>> children.
>>
>> This is not fair to Eckhardt. The distinction between the horrible things
>> that happen in war and a premeditated strategy of pursuing those horrible
>> things is real and important. If you don't believe that, read up on war
>> crimes. But you do believe it, and it's hard to imagine that you would
>> take
>> the same shot at someone identified as a supporter of Ukraine. Perhaps
>> because you think Eckhardt is on the wrong side, you are cheapening
>> yourself to try to score some kind of debating point on him. It only makes
>> one of you look bad, and it's not him. To state the obvious, it's bad when
>> children are killed in war, and worse when that killing is "weaponized."
>>
>> Posting tweets here that consist of nothing but the tweet's url and maybe
>> a
>> delphic subject line adds almost no value to the board. Anyone who can
>> read
>> these emails can follow a twitter account (and if they can't, there is
>> absolutely no point in sharing links to tweets). If you have something to
>> say about a tweet and need more than 280 characters to say it, by all
>> means, develop the thought and share it here. But if you're just going to
>> share a tweet, for God's sake, do it on Twitter. Sharing a tweet's url
>> here
>> but declining to retweet it can fairly be understood as an expression of
>> disregard or disrespect to your audience here, if not implicit hostility.
>>
>> Please take this as a sign of my belief that you have something to say,
>> and
>> of my desire to see it published in the right place.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 1:18 PM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> https://twitter.com/DMokryk/status/1536411047678169088?s=20&t=Lq75Xoo_e8wPP3vDsKJepQ
>> > --
>> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>> >
>> --
>> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>>
>
More information about the Pynchon-l
mailing list