1. Exquisite Tweets from @ph, @annapickard, @tomcoates, @indec

    blechCollected by blech

    I just measured: it takes me 45 minutes of uninterrupted time to read a day of tweets. This is obviously not sustainable.

    Reply Retweet Like

    ph

    Paul Hammond

  2. Missing tweet: 172341350409318401

  3. @ph That is why I only follow 99 people. Some of whom are unmissably interesting and some, like you, who are nice and quiet.

    Reply Retweet Like

  4. @ph I still find it weird that you read all of the tweets.

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomcoates

    Tom Coates

  5. @ph Is that *just* the tweets, or all the associated linkage too? I recently culled my followed list for this reason....

    Reply Retweet Like

    indec

    Ian Malpass

  6. @tomcoates @ph Why is it weird to read all of the tweets? Is that not what the tweets are there for?

    Reply Retweet Like

  7. Missing tweet: 172344040992407552

  8. @waferbaby @tomcoates @ph well it's only the point if you only follow interesting people. If you follow idiots you shouldn't read them all.

    Reply Retweet Like

  9. @indec all the tweets plus the links that looked both interesting and short, but not the 3 things I'm hoping I'll follow up on.

    Reply Retweet Like

    ph

    Paul Hammond

  10. @annapickard @ph I dunno. I guess I just treat it like being in a room with lots of people I like. I don't have to hear every conversation.

    Reply Retweet Like

    tomcoates

    Tom Coates

  11. @ph Yeah. Unfortunately, adjusting my followed list just produced a higher density of interesting links. I did thin my RSS list too, though.

    Reply Retweet Like

    indec

    Ian Malpass

  12. @tomcoates @ph I guess -tend to think I've already filtered the conversations I want to be a part of by following. So read what's there.

    Reply Retweet Like