I see the problem as there is too many ‘normies’ on the internet so things have devolved into catering to the lowest common denominator resulting in basic sites, simplistic everything and copy/paste designs.
Things are always better before the mass of humans flood to use it. This was true for vacations, vehicles, computers, internet, cellphones etc…
One could say The Industrial Revolution and Its Consequences have been a disaster for the human race; but that sentiment tends to get you put on a list now-a-days for some weird reason.
To add to that. The reason this is noted is that Twitter only has upvotes and no downvotes. So, something could have hundreds of likes, which looks good, but when compared to a reply against it with thousands you can see the meassure of public disagreement.
Yeah, but generally people like what has lots of likes because that’s what appears to be the thing to like so they like it.
Like all those times you see some idiot upvoted or someone inexplicably downvoted. Once the herd starts stampeding, whether toward a cliff or a greeny pasture, it won’t stop.
This. To my understanding, “ratio” has always been replies and QRTs vs likes and RTs. The madder people are, the more they want to say.
I definitely see more people ratioed by my definition than the other; when a ton of replies happen, it’s harder for a single one to get enough traction to overtake the OP, but you can still see that everyone is mad.
I never fully got it as a twitter user, but it has something to do with the ratio of likes I believe. The one person has hundreds where the other has 10s of thousands.
Oh, the ratio
The whole “competition” on social networking is why the internet sucks
I see the problem as there is too many ‘normies’ on the internet so things have devolved into catering to the lowest common denominator resulting in basic sites, simplistic everything and copy/paste designs.
Things are always better before the mass of humans flood to use it. This was true for vacations, vehicles, computers, internet, cellphones etc…
You could make that argument for life in general.
The industrial revolution is when everything started falling apart environmentally
One could say The Industrial Revolution and Its Consequences have been a disaster for the human race; but that sentiment tends to get you put on a list now-a-days for some weird reason.
I blame the Neolithic.
Removed by mod
As someone who has never used twitter what di you mean?
To be “ratio’d” or to note a ratio in regards to Twitter means that the reply received more likes/retweets than the original or higher up tweet.
To add to that. The reason this is noted is that Twitter only has upvotes and no downvotes. So, something could have hundreds of likes, which looks good, but when compared to a reply against it with thousands you can see the meassure of public disagreement.
Yeah, but generally people like what has lots of likes because that’s what appears to be the thing to like so they like it.
Like all those times you see some idiot upvoted or someone inexplicably downvoted. Once the herd starts stampeding, whether toward a cliff or a greeny pasture, it won’t stop.
I thought that meant that a comment got more replies than likes
This. To my understanding, “ratio” has always been replies and QRTs vs likes and RTs. The madder people are, the more they want to say.
I definitely see more people ratioed by my definition than the other; when a ton of replies happen, it’s harder for a single one to get enough traction to overtake the OP, but you can still see that everyone is mad.
there are many ratios to be considered
I never fully got it as a twitter user, but it has something to do with the ratio of likes I believe. The one person has hundreds where the other has 10s of thousands.