tweets

So yes, the 'recent tweets' (and the older posts) sections are at odds with a total minimalist style.

You see people posting 20 part tweets, or posting an essay in image form to their facebook wall.

People very often work around it by creating a string of tweets to build long(er) form posts.

Wasn't there some speculation that twitter itself had some bots auto-generating fake users, sending fake tweets, etc?

Note that this is only 8 days after the first two (and only two at the time) #gamergate tweets.

They are not always in chronological order and their seems to be no logic behind the way tweets are grouped.

We've been doing them even faster than that recently - check the tweets on the front page of the site.

And Craig Newmark tweets that he is donating $1M to the EFF and makes it sound like it's coming from his funds[1].

One thing I've noticed with celebrity accounts: an increasing amount of tweets is just a link to a new instagram post.

How far back were you able to go in his tweets?

Two paragraphs, a screenshot of a tweets, and that's 'content'?

Those 20 tweets are still 11kB uncompressed!

The "Recent Tweets" part of this site feels somehow at odds with the principles though.

There are no more tweets with "gamergate" in them until nearly 6 months later.

Twitter needs multi-level threaded discussions and "sub-tweets" that are more than 140 characters.

This is a terrible article, it only repeats and speculates on articles that appeared previous days, with some random tweets as further "evidence".