Lame. Lamer. Viral.

Last week, on Wednesday morning, i woke up at around 7.30. Which is late given 7 is my usual get-going schedule. I hurried to kitchen to prepare tea (a morning ritual that i've been true to for almost a year now) before sacrificing two Parle-G biscuits. One drowns and you let another in with the hope it will rescue the martyr. You know the drill. Tragic as it sounds, i posted a tweet on the same. Little did i know what was to follow. 

More on that later. 

Over the years, my priorities on Twitter have changed a lot. Some years ago, receiving a #FF meant a lot to me. But then, i stopped giving them back and magically, i stopped receiving them too. You see, in the online world, i-will-scratch-your-back-only-if-you-scratch-mine mantra works. I RT you and you'll RT me. I compliment your DP and you compliment mine. It's a massive goo moulded by a mutual admiration society. Also, it's all about numbers nowadays. So, coming back to the priorities i mentioned earlier, i don't care much for RTs anymore. I'm more into collecting hearts—no cheese intended—because it's a very noiseless process. The best part being there is no i-will-heart-your-tweet-if-you-heart-mine racket here. So, yes, I heart others' tweets a lot. If there is an interesting tweet on my timeline, i'll like it where i RT it or not. It's an instant mode of recognition; it creates a personal touch between the one who tweeted and the one who hearted. And unlike a retweet spree which can create a ruckus on the timeline, a heart spree doesn't spam your followers. 

That said, my RT-to-Tweet ratio is quite high compared to others solely on the merit of my silence. Since i don't interact on the timeline, my tweets are generally rhetoric and helps my RT2T ratio stay afloat. Which is why i find this biscuit tweet's virality quite amusing. Of late, my tweets garner more hearts than retweets. In fact, my tweets' RT average must lie somewhere between 15 and 20 while the heart average is early 30-ish. I understand these figures are low given the amount of time i've spent on Twitter. Which, again, is why i found the spread of my biscuit tweet remarkable. Some tweeps were guessing that this tweet must have reached some firang's account. To be honest, i don't know for sure because i don't check my Twitter notifications. It's been stuck at 99+ for ages now. I rely more on Hootsuite which displays only those tweets that mention my handle. Besides, i don't have the energy or the inclination to check who did what. 

Speaking of which, my friends on Facebook checked how frequently my tweet was picked up by various Facebook accounts. Of course, you can't expect these shady accounts to hand you credit but that's not the point. The point is you never know what's going to click with the public on social media. 

If you think Instagram would be nicer in following netiquette, you're mistaken. But that's not the point. The point is one of my lamer tweets went viral while my more thoughtful ones remain bacterial.  

Of course, there are honourable exceptions but they are few.

PS: There's an incredible scene in Wag the Dog (1997) when Dustin Hoffman screams, “Fuck my life! I want the credit.” This is before his character gets killed. 

PSS. Like i said earlier, my priorities have changed. 

Waiting for the itch

Exactly seven years ago, i signed up on Twitter having no idea what it was all about. It had a famous character limit of 140 which i found exciting. I simply took it up as a challenge to condense my thoughts within the available space. My initial followers were some random “gay” bots from Australia. To make matters worse, i used to reply to them thinking they were for real. It took me a while to figure out what a bot was. This was way before i turned into one. But more interestingly, i was thrilled to be sharing a platform with the who's who of the world. My favourite Hollywood stars, footballers and other global personalities had Twitter handles. Wow. It was being invited to a VVVVIP party. Like a moron, i was shooting them tweets hoping they will read it. I wasn't expecting replies from them. My expectations have always been lower than my self-esteem. I remember once congratulating Stephen Fry on something, once XOXO-ing Monica Bellucci's fake account and once telling Dalai Lama that he was absolutely right! 

*facepalmsammelan*

I often used to disagree with Deepak Chopra and made no bone about displaying my opinions in public. Taslima Nasreen once suggested that she'd love to adopt me. OK, she didn't. But she said something to the effect of becoming rich enough one day to let me tweet carelessly the way i did. She was one of the last Twitter folks i spoke to before turning silent in 2010. I used to converse with non-celebs. A lot, actually. About movies, music, football and life in general. Fortunately, i never got into an argument with anyone. Was too lazy to do that back then. Am too laziest to do that right now. Some things don't change. What really changed though is i don't attract trolls like i did back in '12 and '13. Maybe they've realized that there's no point nitpicking. Nobody wins in a battle involving me. Not me. Not them. What also changed is the way Twitter is functioning today, especially in our country. During my early days, there was a Christmasy positive spirit throughout the year. Brand contests were just picking up. People weren't into politics and used to have random conversations dictated by the trends in the West. Nowadays, Twitter India is more desi. There's a clear balance. If there are SRK fans hosting fanaticism on one hand, then there are Sallu fans on the other. The same is true for political party supporters. There are liberals as well as bhakts. The habit of labelling people just because they don't agree with your views is also fast catching steam. The level of humour is also swinging nicely. Of course, American tweeps can't be beaten when it comes to jokes written in English. One of the main reasons why this is so is, an Indian tweep would be more comfortable RT-ing a random Umreeki guy than an Indian one. There is a fetching circle within which most tweeps operate. I-scratch-your-back-and-you-scratch-mine attitude is in full display. Which is why even the most celebrated Indian tweeps aren't going global as such as their finest tweets remain within the pre-ordained circle. The easiest route out is to stay away from these circles like i do but your reach will be heavily compromised. Are you prepared for that? If yes, don't expect logic behind everything you read. You are better off on the other side. No, not with Adele. 

Speaking of the other side, i finally signed up on Instagram and Snapchat in 2015. For somebody who works in the social media sector, i'm damn slow. However, everyday is a lesson for me in how human behaviour is ridiculously different after the login button is hit. I see how people turn funny or righteous just because they believe their online avatar demands so. If you try to break the mould they'll mock you. An Akshar can't tweet philosophical stuff even if he wants to. He has to stick with awesome graphics and lame puns. There's no scope for evolution per se. You aren't supposed to change. Your old forgotten tweets and FB posts won't let you. Look at me. I haven't changed either. I was tad boring on the evening of December 29th, 2009. I still am. 

Same old new silence

Not a day goes by i don't get the annoyingly amusing “Why don't you reply?”—mainly through online comments. The irony in replying to someone explaining why i don't reply beats me. Besides, i'm feeling too old for this shit now where i'm expected to explain my actions/inactions. Especially when the whole idea was to be online without giving a crap about who thought how about what. Thankfully, i've continued to post whatever i felt like sharing be it on Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram or WhatsApp. I'm not answerable to anyone and vice versa. At least that's what i maintain from my end. Some days ago, somebody messaged me saying that i could have gained a lot more followers had i bothered to converse on timeline. Apparently, it's good for one's image! I thought about that for a bit and it actually made sense. People who got addicted to Social Media years after i did are far more influential than i'll ever be. Apparently, i've created a snobbish image for myself. And that's something i fail to understand. How is a person who is not bothering you AT ALL a snob? Shouldn't it be the other way around? People expecting complete strangers to interact with them as if it's a birthright should be considered snobbish, shouldn't they? Anyway, i don't really care who calls whom what. I must admit though that my style of expression has changed a bit. I don't try to be funny. I'm so much more comfortable in being random nowadays. In fact, i'm convinced that humour is the curse of our generation. Everybody is expected to be hilarious all the time that it's not funny anymore! I'd rather prefer to be morose and stark. Life is like that. A few gobs of alcohol or a gust of smoke can't change that. Sorry. I understand humans better than most of those breathing around me. Just that i'm not manipulative enough. About three years ago, i wrote a blog post on similar lines and I can tell you that the change in tone has nothing to do with the fact that my hair is greying at a phenomenal rate but because after a point, you really don't give a fuck. After a point, you don't check your mentions or google your name or check the stats on which lame tweet performed well. You do so despite fully understanding that you're just fading away leaving behind a digital footprint with the potential to embarrass. Coming back to the original question, it's not true that i don't reply. I do. The only difference i don't create an unnecessary scene out of it. People have conversations on the timeline with the sole intention of upping each other in terms of wit, if not insults. It's a show business with no money rolling. The timeline is a stage and everybody's performing. I used to do that back in 2010. That was then. As of now, i do have an open DM. So anybody who's desperately dying to talk to me can message me so that we can converse like civilized people usually do—privately. But seldom does anybody do that. Everybody wants to have a freak show on the timeline, not a decent conversation where thoughts are exchanged. Maybe that's why i never receive DMs asking me “Why don't you reply?” ending with an emoji. 

Dharmsancutandpaste

I recently came across a well-written blog post about how it's not ethically right to plagiarize tweets. I agree for the most part that we shouldn't lift creative materials blindly without bothering to give credit where it's due. It's a terrible way of getting by. Getting inspired is one thing and stealing, quite another. However, one should avoid this malpractice for two major reasons:

1. You wouldn't want THAT to happen to you (at least in the online world).

2. You don't really want to be seen as a prick (at least in the offline world). 

Having said that, i still feel that tweets don't fall under the category of art. Tweeps aren't artists by any yardstick. Who coins words anymore? Twitteratis may claim expertise in wordplay and instant humour, it'd be preposterous to put them in the same category as someone who dedicates oneself to a particular stream of creativity. Tweeps are way too random and spontaneous in comparison. And that's how they are supposed to be! See something and post something about it in not more than 140 characters. Minute in and minute out.

But plagiarism is a touchy as well as a vague topic and sometimes, we have the following order of situations: 

a. You post a tweet and somebody points out that it was already tweeted earlier, specifically suggesting that you must have copied it. 

b. You don't know how to respond to it because it seems like you have copied a joke (of all things!) when you don't even remember reading it earlier. To you, your tweet dropped straight out of your head. 

c. Interestingly, the person claiming that you plagiarized has fewer followers than you and is crying foul how twelebs (twitter celebs, whatever that mean or entail) rob the non-twelebs (although they can't wait to turn into twelebs) of fame and prosperity that timeline was originally designed for. 

d. On one hand, the person is claiming that his tweet doesn't get the exposure it SO deserves and on another, he also points out that somebody more exposed than him has stolen his line. 

e. Now, the question is "How the fuck is that even possible?" when the claimant is basically contradicting himself. 

This is why i feel the whole practice of screaming "Yeh pehle ho chuka hai"—whenever a tweet reminds someone on Twitter of something they'd already read before—redundant. Does it really matter? I don't know about you but my tweets mattered to me a lot about 4-5 years ago. Not anymore. I don't give a click who copies my lame one-liners. In fact, i feel good to know at least somebody cares enough to steal my unhealthy body of words (which i didn't even invent in the first place). Aren't we all borrowers of words? 

Anyway, that's me.

To each his own, as they so like to preach. But then, what's the point of quarreling over a sentence or two when there is so much more going on? As we tweet, books are being written. Not to forget pieces on how it's easier and worthier to plagiarize a blog post than a stupid tweet.