I only read it /because/ it was a twitter thread. I wouldn't have clicked the link if it had been a blog post (unless I read the comments here and found a compelling reason)
To defend twitter: each tweet in the thread has to have a point, something compelling about it - and in this case, an image with each. The limitations of twitter force the author to write concisely (as opposed to blogs, where paragraphs can be as rambling and long-winded as the author pleases). The medium also allows persons to reply to any individual tweet - performing a similar role as threaded comments on a site like HN, but more focused. Twitter is an ideal format for short-to-medium length content like this.
> I only read it /because/ it was a twitter thread
> Twitter is an ideal format for short-to-medium length content like this.
So you do enjoy having text broken down in small pieces inside an interface that's obviously made for short messages, with ads on the side, and replies right in the middle of the main body of the text?
All right. I guess we have different standards of readability.
> So you do enjoy having text broken down in small pieces inside an interface that's obviously made for short messages
I do enjoy having text broken down into small, coherent pieces - whether it be a tweet or a paragraph. Twitter enforces it, blog platforms do not. While neither twitter nor blog platforms can enforce writing quality, length limits at least prevent the most egregious run-on sentences.
> with ads on the side,
Twitter doesnt have ads for me on any device - app or browser, computer or phone. Blogs generally have ads (that circumvent my blocker) or empty white space (where ads had been) on every device. Twitter has centred text on my laptop (comparable to most blog platforms), or the text fills my full screen width on my phone (better than most blog platforms).
> and replies right in the middle of the main body of the text?
I don't see replies in the main body of the text. I can click on any given tweet to see the various replies, but otherwise the author's tweets remain in an unbroken chain.
As if blogs don't have ads on the side or even in the middle of a post occasionally. A properly threaded message will have all of the content linked together with replies falling all the way to the bottom. Just like a blog.
Twitter isn't nearly as difficult to use as some people like to make it out to be. My biggest petpeeve on Twitter. Is 30 different replies of "@ThreadReaderApp unroll".
Although reading is more comfortable (for me) in a blog post, posts also tend to have way more junk before it gets to the point. I.e.: recipe posts, entertainment news, etc...
To defend twitter: each tweet in the thread has to have a point, something compelling about it - and in this case, an image with each. The limitations of twitter force the author to write concisely (as opposed to blogs, where paragraphs can be as rambling and long-winded as the author pleases). The medium also allows persons to reply to any individual tweet - performing a similar role as threaded comments on a site like HN, but more focused. Twitter is an ideal format for short-to-medium length content like this.