• rmuk@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Originally it was a technical necessity since Twitter had to work via SMS which has a limit of 160 characters. The enforced brevity was part of it’s original charm IMHO.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      I know where the limit came from but no one forced them to use SMS or make an app, period.

      I never understood how forcing people into so few characters was a good thing. All it did was make people post less thoughtfully and more often.

      This whole thread is people pissed off that NDT posts things without thinking about how they come off so it kind of makes sense he would do that on Twitter.

      • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        I sorta get it. Limits allow for creativity. I find myself being the most creative when I work within limits, selfimposed or otherwise. That’s why I love dnd and pathfinder.

      • three
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’d argue that it encouraged more thoughtful and creative posts. Having that hard character limit forced people into refactoring their thoughts into brief, information rich sentences. Take a look at Vine, it only allowed 7 seconds of video. That hard limit pushed the limits of sketch comedy and peoples’ creativity. Or take a look at this reply, I’m at over 340 characters. If I had a limit, I would be forced into rethinking my words to make a concise but persuasive argument, but now I can faff about, instead of getting to the point.