The “Readers added context” feature is the only good thing about Twitter.

  • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think she’s attaching his chimp comment in her reply as a way of displaying his hypocrisy.

    But I’m not sure. I’ve never used Twitter and always find the screenshots stupid to read.

    • Uprise42@artemis.camp
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I didn’t use twitter before Elon bought it, and have stayed much further away since he has. It’s possible I’m misreading due to something like that, but if I am that’s also poor design. It looks like a legitimate reply to hers. If users can manipulate replies in line with their tweets that just makes the site even worse

      • SomeoneElseMod@feddit.ukOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not a big Twitter user but how you know this isn’t a reply; firstly the date. The chimp tweet is 7 years old, the block conversation is from 3 days ago. Secondly, you see the white vertical lines between musks first and second tweet? That indicates it’s part of the same thread. The chimp tweet doesn’t have one because the woman has “quote tweeted” something he said in the past. Finally you see how “blocked” is in bold in his last tweet? That happens when you search for a word - it appears in bold in the results. I believe the woman went to musk’s profile and searched all his tweets for “blocked”. Then she quote tweeted it back to him in this conversation.

        • glimse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is correct on all counts, it’s a quoted tweet. What we’re seeing is the “thumbnail” of the link. Click it and go to the post

      • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        After looking again I did notice the chimp comment is dated 2018, so I believe I’m correct