Try sending 2000 political email messages at once from the Mercury office and watch how fast your ISP blocks you. Is your ISP not wanting to be used as a political tool then?

Can we keep Twitter for the funz and not for sending mass spam that does nothing but annoy and clog up timelines?

I am so disappointed I still have to read you, even in passing.

Gotta love your end justifies the means attitude!

How would you feel if some spamming buttmuch did that to you, let's say instead for, I dunno, a Mitt Romney fundraiser?

twitter did the right thing.

Twitter -- "all the inventiveness of a literary form"

LOLWTFBBQ

@5, I know, right? #4rilz?

Wow, I thought that was going to be about, "Ugh, i'm so bummed, Twitter is over because it's going to be ruined by all these mass-tweeting jerkwads spamming the heck out of the service" -- but nope.

I... agree with Twitter.

Since I agree with every comment posted here thus far, I'll just troll:

"I THOUGHT THUNDERCLAP WAS WHAT RICHARD GERE WAS RUMORED TO HAVE BACK IN THE 80S."

From what I know now, Twitter probably made the right decision. It's not hard to see how Thunderclap could be used as a spamming service, especially by pyramid marketing types. It'd be interesting to hear what, if any, preventative measures Thunderclap has included. What's great about Twitter is how it allows you to manage your signal to noise ratio yourself, something Facebook does not. Sounds like Thunderclap might undermine that. Simply put, I think Twitter wants to remain social, but wants to allow users to determine who comes to their own party.