Look here you said this wasn’t a Tweeter, but when you have ‘Tweet this’ button, the contradiction is horrible. Could you change that ‘Tweet This’ button to a ‘Woof This’ button?
Let me tell you though that ROARER with a ‘Roar This’ button will climb over the heads on all those ‘Woofers’ on leashes. Fine a bird merely tweets, can’t do damage a dog can. But dogs are on leashes, have no rights in society are at the mercy of being neutered (if not already so) all the time and are no great icon of freedom.
Woofer is one step up from Twitter but not good enough by above embedded listed meanings. Even Roarer could be less effective simply being ‘beastial’ (Lions can’t socialise in Human society and do little else than be caged, eat and procreate) . . .
‘Commenter’ while human of course, is not very interesting though, you’d find each type of communication site will have it’s fans and does show what kind of people they are.
Twitter = Airheads who allow themselves to be squeezed into 140 words.
Woofer = Technicality/semantics/NLP unaware buffs who allow themselves to be forced into keying in 1400 words. What a mockery. Do the site owners not know that sometimes people can post something meaningful less than1400 words? How lame and intentionally irritating can website conceptualists get?
Roarer = Leaders who are NLP unaware buffs – 14,000 words should be tolerable for the most verbose among commentators. And if 14K is the minimum post, don’t expect many postings and a tiny community of academics or extra ‘typey’ sorts. You’re still an animal. Animals have no souls by Monotheism. So who needs to be associated with posts that have no soul?
Finally, and the best choice, ‘Commenter’ = For real people that make intelligible comments of ANY length, and are not into all that ‘kitsch on the backs of animals’ thing (this is kinda porn format if anything, nothing against porn tho).
The other 3 are like sugar coating veggies so that children will eat with a fly thrown in (A fly that says 140 or less if not 1400 or more). You’re building a linguistic dystopia with such idiot named or idiot expression limited sites. Don’t tell us how short or long to post, that’s for us to decide ya creeps. Grow up and stop getting on the nerves of people with any common sense.
Twitter is for Twits? Woofer is for Woofs. As Nutter is for Nuts. There is also the sex oriented ‘Twatter’ for ‘Twats’. Hatter (Mad) . . . Tweeter would sound better but Twit? No thanks, the NLP associability kills Twitter for moi . . .