|
|
|
|
|
|
by peawee
1990 days ago
|
|
|
> The last-modified headers indicate that the front page and docs have not been updated since May 2018. This is not a viable platform and the analysis of Twitter's technical shortcomings is facile. The original 140 character limit, now doubled to 280 characters, was originally constrained by the SMS interface Twitter supported but ultimately imposes a preferred content style that distinguishes the microblogging experience. Your analysis of Blerg's analysis of Twitter's technical shortcomings is facile. It's a system that the author put together while intoxicated to poke fun at Twitter. Reading any more into it than that is at best highly unadvised. (Source: Used to live with Blerg's author) |
|
|
The HN title is "a microblogging platform", the landing page has a section titled "But what's wrong with Twitter?", and the documentation has a "Design" [1] section. If the author intended to poke fun at Twitter as a stand-in for all microblogging platforms then leave out the engineering aspects and if the author intended to poke fun at Twitter engineering then land some technical blows. If the point of the exercise is to demonstrate how much code and documentation can be pumped out during a drinking binge then the author should state that upfront; that context is useful.
[1] https://blerg.cc/doc/#design