This may be Hiezen Slatchken but If you breef ole CJ's twitter feed....

[Jake Wimberly]

It is no doubt this cat is whacked. Serious issues and high drama. Just sayin on a Friday.

 

[Jake Wimberly]

It is no doubt this cat is whacked. Serious issues and high drama. Just sayin on a Friday.

 

[drt7891]

nm

 

[Jake Wimberly]

http://twitter.com/#!/dandydozn10

 

[drt7891]

nm

 

[joedawg]

<div>
</div><div><div class="tweet-row" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; display: block; position: relative; line-height: 17px; clear: left; color: rgb(68, 68, 68); font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><div class="tweet-user-block" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "> <div class="tweet-user-block-name" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 40px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; min-height: 36px; line-height: 16px; ">@dandydozn10<span class="tweet-user-block-full-name" style="margin-top: 1px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; display: block; font-size: 12px; color: rgb(153, 153, 153); ">CJ Johnson</span></div></div></div><div class="tweet-row" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; display: block; position: relative; line-height: 17px; clear: left; color: rgb(68, 68, 68); font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; "><div class="tweet-text tweet-text-large" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 8px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 0px; font-family: Georgia, Palatino, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif !important; line-height: 27px; word-wrap: break-word; font-size: 21px; font-weight: normal; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; ">I had a vision this morning. Ole Miss in Atlanta next fall playing for the sec championship and all the rebel fans yell<span class="hash" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; display: inline-block; opacity: 0.7; ">#</span><span class="hash-text" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; ">hottytoddy</span>love it</div></div></div>

 

[Jake Wimberly]

He is going to be a very sad dude. His twitter feed should be off the chain this fall.

 

[myusernamesucks]

If you go back a page or two.

 

[Shmuley]

nm

 

[drt7891]

<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(68, 68, 68); font-family: Georgia, Palatino, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 21px; line-height: 27px; ">Missed class don't kno what the hell bout to happen</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(68, 68, 68); font-family: Georgia, Palatino, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 21px; line-height: 27px; "></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(68, 68, 68); font-family: Georgia, Palatino, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 21px; line-height: 27px; "><span class="hash" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; display: inline-block; opacity: 0.7; ">#</span><span class="hash-text" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; ">trouble</span></span>

 

[57stratdawg]

by the OM coaches to get off Twitter when he signed.

How's that working out?

 

[Jake Wimberly]

que the comigy. hello JSU</p>

 

[RonnyAtmosphere]

...if he is having visions of UM making Atlanta, then he needs to lay off the hallucinogens.


I would hazard a guess that the only vision he should be pursuing at this time is qualifying.

 

[VirgilCain]

Is it because its twitter and not facebook? Is it because he's actually arrived at OM (for 2 weeks im guessing)?

Unless he's saying something directly affecting MSU or newsworthy, lets not go all "genespage" on in a kids social networking pages. Just sayin'

 

[AssEndDawg]

Is it because its twitter and not facebook? Is it because he's actually arrived at OM (for 2 weeks im guessing)?

Unless he's saying something directly affecting MSU or newsworthy, lets not go all "genespage" on in a kids social networking pages. Just sayin'

In order to see someone's Facebook feed you have to establish a relationship with them. So that's a grown man "friending" a player in order to stalk them and they have some small expectation of it being private. Twitter is just you throwing your **** out there for the world. That's a stupid decision on his part to broadcast his life to the interwebs. If something news-worthy comes out of it (skipping class or delusional talk of a SEC West championship) then it's worth hearing about.

I see these two things as completely different.

 

[dawgstudent]

it's Twitter. Facebook has a completely different process to view someone's info. Twitter is out there for the world to see and if you are going to act like a dumbass (see Renardo Sidney and Ravern Johnson) - well - it's out there for public consumption.

 

[VirgilCain]

Sidney and Ravern are/were MSU players (directly involving MSU)... For facebook, Pony-Gate was newsworthy (but the guy who discovered it is creepy for following those kids facebook pages). I see no problem with either of those two scenarios. But searching, finding, reading, and posting a kids social networking without any outside prompting just doesn't sit right with me as a legitimate way to spend a one's time.

I didn't open any of the links so I had no idea what CJ was saying, so maybe it was something relevant. I just briefly rolled my cursor over the replies to see if anything substantial was there. I saw the reply about him already missing class, which immediately reminded me of those crazy rivals and scout posters that would post a kids frivolous facebook messages onto the message boards out of spite.

BTW, aren't all facebook pages completely open for the public to view until the user changes their privacy settings (its been so long since I joined facebook but that's how it used to be)? Its the same for twitter, my twitter account is private to only the people I allow. And yes, CJ, Renardo, Ravern, ect., are all idiots for not using the privacy settings. Very little good can come from an open social account, but so much can go wrong (Former Rep. Weiner "likes" this).

 

[AssEndDawg]

They are different things used for different purposes. Twitter is intended to be a place where you share brief thoughts with the entire world. Facebook is a gathering spot for your "friends" where you can post pictures and discussions. A new Facebook page starts wide-open but they walk you through securing it. 99% of all Facebook users secure their page and manage who can see what. Twitter does give you the ability to be private but that sort of goes against the point of Twitter. I would guess 99% of Twitter users don't make private Tweets the default (but they do use private Tweets in some instances like sending pictures of your penis).

I completely agree with you that Facebook stalking is weird and wrong but a NCAA student athlete (especially one who dumped us) tweeting that they skipped class is fair game. Assuming there is a NCAA student athlete stupid enough to do that....

 

[FlabLoser]

Facebook can be 100% public if the users sets it up that way. Last time I looked - quite a while a go - Whitehead's fb page was wide open to the public.

 

[FlabLoser]

Both twitter and facebook can be equally private or equally public. All depends on whether or not someone wants all the world to see or just people that they have allowed to see.

 

[Uncle Ruckus]

that everything this young 'man' does is going to be talked about amongst dawg fans. and i have no problem with it. this young 'man' is a dirty sob. i don't need to go into details as to what happened between him and tsotr [the school on the rise(can than be a acronym for state?)]. i may not be as old as some people on here but i've been a dawg since i was in diapers and i haven't seen anything this crazy as far as a players signing goes. also, i hope this young 'man' is the next coming of chris strong, which i have a feeling he will exceed expectations. btw, anyone remember the junk that strong said via the interweb, very similiar to jc

 

[AssEndDawg]

Where did I say that? I said that Facebook was wide open but that nearly all people enact the privacy controls. I said that Twitter had privacy controls just that few people use them. I guess I'm not seeing what part you are saying is not true....

 

[jakldawg]

is for the "default" to be wide-***-open to the public (and third-party advertisers/data miners and what-not) until you get some common sense and/or aren't a total attention ***** and put some privacy settings on them.<div>Hence the ensuing hilarity.</div><div>(and you CAN deny people both the ability to 'friend' you and 'follow' you. Not that any of the people in question ever has.)</div>

 

[drt7891]

for instance, twitter, or this very response to you on a message board, is considered "public." Which means, this will never hold up as an evasion of privacy in a court because I have consciously written it in a public place. Twitter is no different. Sure, some may consider it "creepy," but CJ decided in his own "adult mind" that he wants to tweet these things in a very public manner, so I see nothing wrong with us talking about it. <div>
</div><div>There have been cases of companies considering applicants for a job to go looking for that person's facebook page or twitter account to find out more information about them. Even going through a mutual friend is legal. Anything posted in a public domain is considered fair game.</div><div>
</div><div>Now, if by chance I knew your real name (and believe me, there is no way I do, but for the sake of example) and I came on here and started calling you by your real name, THAT is an evasion of privacy because you gave me no consent to put your name out there. Big difference. CJ made no attempts to keep his stuff private, you and me, on the other hand, have. </div>

 

[VirgilCain]

Are you seriously being serious? I'm gonna go out on a limb here, but I'm guessing you're relatively new to the social-networking world (not bragging because its totally nerdy). To lend credence to the remainder of my post, I will direct you to this current CNN.com article (6/10/11), "Twitter is the new Facebook". If it wasn't blatantly obvious, Twitter is simply a spin-off of facebook.

Now, let me dissect the gross inaccuracies of your post:

They are different things used for different purposes. Twitter is intended to be a place where you share brief thoughts with the entire world. Facebook is a gathering spot for your "friends" where you can post pictures and discussions.

So, how would you describe Facebook's status update feature? You know, the thing where idiot girls fill up your facebook newsfeed with pointless information about their mundane daily activities?

I actually agree with your second sentence (but not for long, see the aforementioned CNN article) but that is only because facebook is vastly more developed than Twitter. BTW, twitter is actually full of pictures. "Twitpics" are one of the most popular aspects of Twitter (definitely my personal favorite aspect).

Twitter does give you the ability to be private but that sort of goes against the point of Twitter. I would guess 99% of Twitter users don't make private Tweets the default

Not so fast. For public figures/celebrities, the public option is a good to promote yourself. But I, and everyone I know on Twitter, joined because it is like a "mulligan" version of facebook (my list of twitter friends is MAYBE 1/10 of my facebook friends) . You can post ridiculously hilarious notes and/or pics with ONLY your real friends (by using the privacy settings and only allowing the people/friends you want to see your updates) without having to de-friend numerous facebook "acquaintances" .......BUT, more importantly, not having to worry about potential social/employment repercussions from SOCIAL NETWORK STALKERS (see: this thread, RSS, Ravern, Rep. Weiner, Boobie Dixon, Pony-Gate, Devin Jones, ect... and let us not forget the facebook pics of DD and Mr. Ed that were absolute jet-fuel for the inception of the vaunted DDDY Award).

99% of all Facebook users secure their page and manage who can see what.

Nope, just absolutely wrong. Maybe 60-80% of young professionals (the people worried about finding/starting/keeping career jobs) have totally private facebook & twitter pages. But highschool kids and the new users (I'm mainly referring to the older age group) are definitely are not taking advantage of the privacy features. Also, people my age who aren't facing and/or scared of employment or social repercussions from an embarrassing pic (or ect.) showing up, are not scared to have public profiles. I have no idea what made you feel so emboldened to say that the percentage was 99%, but that percentage is ludicrous.

a NCAA student athlete (especially one who dumped us) tweeting that they skipped class is fair game.

Why do I get the feeling that if this was reversed (a NAFOOM thread about, lets say, Dee Arrington) that you would be totally on my side of the argument?

 

[MSUArrowCS]

if it's public, it's public. If stalking is a greater risk than getting noticed, that person needs to be smarter about their settings on either site.

I agree with most of what you're saying about the two sites being essentially the same and getting closer. But I completely disagree with the CNN article, which is an opinion article saying that because Twitter is adding instant photo and video sharing that they're deciding to directly compete with Facebook. I see the guy's point, which is similar to yours, that the core functionality of the two are getting closer. But Twitter is still driven by the information put out by public figures and companies. In my opinion and that of most Facebook users I know, you could take those things off of Facebook and still have relatively the same number of users. The core of Twitter users, though, are there to consume that type of information. Until that changes, they won't really be in direct competition. That shift might be in the process of occurring, but even publicly, Twitter is still focused on being that "information network".

And in that difference also lies the difference in following an athlete's Twitter page vs. peeping that athlete's Facebook page. Twitter is a lot more like the pages you can "Like" on Facebook, where the owner puts out some statements and their fans talk about those statements, etc. A profile, though, is traditionally much more personal than that, even if the functionality is exactly the same. That's why people are going to be less likely to find it acceptable to dig around a player's Facebook profile instead of digging around that player's Twitter account.

All that to say ... there's no way you can convince me that CJ, Renardo, Ravern, and any of the athletes you've mentioned don't see themselves as celebrities trying to develop a following. Following them on Twitter is just abiding by their wishes.

 

[AssEndDawg]

I was a 1994 MIS Grad
Was on the internet religiously before it went public (doing things I shouldn't have been doing)
Registered one of the first 10,000 domain names
Owned my own computer consulting/software company at 27, sold it at 30

No, I'm not new to social networking. But anyone who will quote a CNN article when discussing anything related to computers has ZERO credibility. But just to humor you...

So, how would you describe Facebook's status update feature? You know,
the thing where idiot girls fill up your facebook newsfeed with
pointless information about their mundane daily activities?

Irrelevant. Yes, Facebook has been tailoring the Feed more toward a twitter style of late but updates were originally not length capped whereas Twitter limits to 140 characters. Lest we forget this is ALL Twitter does while Facebook does much more serving as a place to store pictures, share notes, create blog entries and, most importantly to Facebook, like comments, organizations, places or things. Even looking at the content Twitter and Facebook are nothing alike. The 140 limit sees to that. Oh, and "twitpics" are not Twitter photo storage, it's not even owned by Twitter. It's an image site just like imjur and a thousand others. Twitter allows you to enter links, that is all.

Not so fast. For public figures/celebrities, the public option is a
good to promote yourself. But I, and everyone I know on Twitter, joined
because it is like a "mulligan" version of facebook....

You "and everyone else you know" are using it for your purpose. Great, congrats. That still doesn't change that the overwhelming majority of Twitter users leave it wide open and the overwhelming majority of Facebook users institute some sort of privacy. Your personal habits are meaningless to the argument. Also, the vast majority of famous people who use Facebook have a public page and a private page. So what you see from them isn't "their" page. It's marketing. Their personal page is private like everyone else.

Nope, just absolutely wrong. <blah> <blah> I have no idea what made you
feel so emboldened to say that the percentage was 99%, but that
percentage is ludicrous

I didn't realize I was going to have to source my paper professor. I think anyone with a brain can understand the 99% was an intentional exaggeration. The point was that most Facebook pages are private. Sure, you can go track down stupid high school kids and stupid old people that have open pages. The point is, the expectation most people have when going to Facebook is that they will have to "friend" someone to see their stuff.

Why do I get the feeling that if this was reversed (a NAFOOM thread about, lets say, Dee Arrington) that you would be totally on my side of the argument?

Because you obviously don't know me. I'm a lot of things, but inconsistent isn't one of them.

Look, I understand you put a lot of faith in CNN. Hell, who wouldn't? When I think about who on this planet knows more about technology than anyone else I naturally gravitate toward CNN as well. (Since you have a hard time with hyperbole let me point out that is sarcasm). It is part of my job, and my hobby, to understand the tech world. I read dozens of tech blogs and listen to tech podcasts (some suggestions are Wired, Ars Technica, and my favorite podcast TWiT (This Week in Tech)). All of this is leading up to one point:
<font size="4"><br style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">Anyone who thinks Twitter and Facebook are even remotely the same thing is a huge $!%@%#% dumbass [sic].</span></font>

 

[DerHntr]

this is similar to what it must be like for someone to mouth off to a guy in the bar and then later find out the hard way that the guy is an MMA fighter</p>

 

[hatfieldms]

....

 

[Goat 4 Eva]

nm

 

[Goat 4 Eva]

nm

 

[maroonmadman]

Once they broke all the rules to get CJ up there how could those idiots reasonably expect that he would abide by their rules? Familar with the expression "there is no honor among thieves?" This is a classic pot meets kettle situation. Not only should we jump on any stupid **** he post by whatever means he chooses to post it, we should also encourage it. For us this can only get better.</p>