731
Git gud
(media.piefed.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Jan 2026
731 points (99.5% liked)
People Twitter
9232 readers
1888 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Hey, they're mostly-read Wikipedia articles. It's not my fault I get distracted by opening another article halfway through
Hey, in a blatant attempt at sabotage, have you heard of TV Tropes?
I'm not gonna link it because I don't actually want to sabotage you and you probably already know it. However, it is a lot of fun.
It's weird, TV Tropes has never sucked me in like Wikipedia can. It should, but it just doesn't scratch the same itch for some reason
That's fair.
I don't know if it would have done me, except that in the past I've had several jobs (mostly call centers) where I had a decent amount of free time and relatively open web access, but sat in an area that was sufficiently well trafficked that browsing anything with lots of images (like a webcomic, which would have been my first instinct) was potentially a bad idea. Since TV Tropes is almost entirely text (or was when I frequented it) it was safe to browse at length. Of course, Wikipedia probably would have fulfilled this need as well.
That said, the other aspect for me is that I've always been an avid reader and oft enjoyed movies or TV, so I appreciated its ability to essentially say "oh, you liked x story? You'd probably enjoy y media because they share z details!" It definitely hugely expanded my media library.