Comments on: Twitter: RT vs. Via http://www.widgettwalls.com/2009/05/11/rt-vs-via-twitter/ Fresh from my brain pan to the breakfast tables of the world. Sun, 06 Nov 2011 08:57:58 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1 By: Widge http://www.widgettwalls.com/2009/05/11/rt-vs-via-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-70154 Widge Mon, 17 May 2010 07:48:32 +0000 http://www.widgettwalls.com/?p=520#comment-70154 You're quite welcome, BH. Thanks for the comment. You're quite welcome, BH. Thanks for the comment.

]]> By: bunnyhero http://www.widgettwalls.com/2009/05/11/rt-vs-via-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-70136 bunnyhero Wed, 12 May 2010 16:34:11 +0000 http://www.widgettwalls.com/?p=520#comment-70136 thank you for stating the case for RT. thank you for stating the case for RT.

]]> By: JohnintheUK http://www.widgettwalls.com/2009/05/11/rt-vs-via-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-69477 JohnintheUK Thu, 13 Aug 2009 14:50:23 +0000 http://www.widgettwalls.com/?p=520#comment-69477 I couldn't agree more, I wish everyone would use RT when retweeting. The constant misuse of Via has also meant that it's hard to tell when a Via tweet is actually a Via tweet or just a RT. It's all very confusing. Now when I do a via I have to type "(found via..." to avoid any confusion. I couldn't agree more, I wish everyone would use RT when retweeting. The constant misuse of Via has also meant that it's hard to tell when a Via tweet is actually a Via tweet or just a RT. It's all very confusing. Now when I do a via I have to type "(found via…" to avoid any confusion.

]]> By: Widge http://www.widgettwalls.com/2009/05/11/rt-vs-via-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-69470 Widge Thu, 06 Aug 2009 05:31:20 +0000 http://www.widgettwalls.com/?p=520#comment-69470 Yeah, that's pretty close to what I do. Which again, means it makes probably too much sense to be popular. :-) Yeah, that's pretty close to what I do. Which again, means it makes probably too much sense to be popular. :-)

]]> By: FPC Craig http://www.widgettwalls.com/2009/05/11/rt-vs-via-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-69469 FPC Craig Wed, 05 Aug 2009 20:22:19 +0000 http://www.widgettwalls.com/?p=520#comment-69469 What makes sense to me: RT @user blah blah = I'm quoting user's post, maybe trimmed to fit blah blah [link] (via @user) = user mentioned [link], and I think blah blah about it. blah blah (h/t @user) = user made me think about this (maybe there's a link), possibly via an extra-Twitter channel. The fact that this makes sense to me virtually guarantees that it will not become common usage. It is, nevertheless, what I do. What makes sense to me:
RT @user blah blah = I'm quoting user's post, maybe trimmed to fit
blah blah [link] (via @user) = user mentioned [link], and I think blah blah about it.
blah blah (h/t @user) = user made me think about this (maybe there's a link), possibly via an extra-Twitter channel.
The fact that this makes sense to me virtually guarantees that it will not become common usage. It is, nevertheless, what I do.

]]> By: Widge http://www.widgettwalls.com/2009/05/11/rt-vs-via-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-69188 Widge Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:04:47 +0000 http://www.widgettwalls.com/?p=520#comment-69188 Well, basically the whole thing I saw was RT vs Via as I outlined. Just goes to show it's Twitter Anarchy out there! Hide the chickens! Well, basically the whole thing I saw was RT vs Via as I outlined. Just goes to show it's Twitter Anarchy out there! Hide the chickens!

]]> By: Nick the Geek http://www.widgettwalls.com/2009/05/11/rt-vs-via-twitter/comment-page-1/#comment-69187 Nick the Geek Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:16:32 +0000 http://www.widgettwalls.com/?p=520#comment-69187 My understanding of proper usage called for RT @username tweet (via @usrname2) This usage says that @username originally tweeted the post but usrname2 retweeted that which brought it to your attention. It is not necessary to give credit to the person that RTed the original tweet but it is nice since it gets their name out there for follows. My understanding of proper usage called for

RT @username tweet (via @usrname2)

This usage says that @username originally tweeted the post but usrname2 retweeted that which brought it to your attention. It is not necessary to give credit to the person that RTed the original tweet but it is nice since it gets their name out there for follows.

]]>