People Twitter

10453 readers

975 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
No international politcs
Be excellent to each other.
Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major celebrity, figure or any politician

https://www.sotwe.com/
https://twitterviewer.net/Note: Archive.is is no longer recommended because they remove/alter content.

If a tweet (or similar) makes a statement of fact, either mark it as "satire" in the body or provide the original source link backing up the statement (see rule 6)

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

SendMeYourTaTas@sh.itjust.works

pelespirit@sh.itjust.works

493

Statisticians, is this true? (infosec.pub)

submitted 3 months ago by cm0002@infosec.pub to c/whitepeopletwitter@sh.itjust.works

80 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

I don't think I will ever figure out the order to read these things.

Just... Why? Wouldn't you want it to be formatted in a way that's immediately obvious what order to read them?

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 7 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

I used bluesky lately (which i guess uses the same format?) and it looks like so because we are viewing a reply(3) to a post (2) that cite another post (1)

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 months ago

Thanks. I hate it.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

So convenient.

[–] vala@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Same

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Genuine question: what's confusing about this post?

There are some that are confusingly structured, but this one should be quite obvious

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Obvious would be top to bottom. You know, like how every human reads.

[–] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

For replies, yes. And that is the case. But the first one is a quote, not a reply

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago

And it makes sense to put the reply before the thing they're replying to.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago

You have to read the posts and then put them in order yourself. I see these a lot and I'm still only ever like 90% sure I'm ordering them right.

The other commenter is right, its a stupid way to list a chain of events considering its out of order and doesn't even start with "1".