thanks for engaging.
> The linked tweet (whatever it's called)
"post" works for social media regardless of the medium; not an admonishment, an observation. Also, by the time i saw this, it was already an Ars link, leaving some comments with less context that i apparently didn't pick up on. I was able to make my observation because someone mentioned mastodon (i think), but that was an assumption on my part that the original link was mastodon.
So i asked the question to make sure it wasn't some bias against mastodon (or the fediverse), because I'd have liked to ask, "for what reason?"
> > The linked tweet (whatever it's called)
> "post" works for social media regardless of the medium; not an admonishment, an observation.
It also works for professional journalism and blog-err-posts though, the distinction from which was my point.
> I was able to make my observation because someone mentioned mastodon (i think), but that was an assumption on my part that the original link was mastodon.
As for assuming/'someone' mentioning Mastodon, my own comment you initially replied to ended:
> (As in, an actual article, not just a mastodon-tweet from some unknown (maybe known? Not by me) person making the title claim, with no more info.)
Which was even the bit ('unknown') you objected to.