http://www.anonymong.org/2010/01/18/monday-morning-papers/ Blind in one ear and deaf in one eye Wed, 25 Jan 2012 23:49:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.anonymong.org/2010/01/18/monday-morning-papers/comment-page-1/#comment-1700 Giolla Wed, 20 Jan 2010 19:37:57 +0000 http://www.anonymong.org/?p=691#comment-1700 My wondering about if it was a "follower" was really down to what sort of moron would report that if they actually had some involvement with the initial tweeter. At least some random person that stumbled across it might be able to claim they didn't know it was humour. My wondering about if it was a “follower” was really down to what sort of moron would report that if they actually had some involvement with the initial tweeter. At least some random person that stumbled across it might be able to claim they didn’t know it was humour.

]]> http://www.anonymong.org/2010/01/18/monday-morning-papers/comment-page-1/#comment-1699 Erzulie Frieda Wed, 20 Jan 2010 01:59:42 +0000 http://www.anonymong.org/?p=691#comment-1699 This story was picked up on by the 'Twitterati' just after it broke, and from what I gather it appears that it was indeed a follower. However, bear in mind that if it had been Re-Tweeted it could have been reported by someone a little further along the line. In which case, why arent all the (possible) RT-ers in the dock with him, since I'd be surprised if someone hadn't found it amusing and RT'd it. It was, after all, meant to be a joke. This story was picked up on by the ‘Twitterati’ just after it broke, and from what I gather it appears that it was indeed a follower.
However, bear in mind that if it had been Re-Tweeted it could have been reported by someone a little further along the line. In which case, why arent all the (possible) RT-ers in the dock with him, since I’d be surprised if someone hadn’t found it amusing and RT’d it. It was, after all, meant to be a joke.

]]>