Sam Downing

Screenshot evidence

These are all 100 percent real names (of fake Twitter spambots). My favourites are highlighted in bold. Praise be to whatever amazing algorithm is generating all these whimsical wonders…

Blakeway Bush

Orrin Schlemmer

Roxie Glines

Lonnie Marcellus

Fidelia Altaras

Aleida Hnatow [sic]

Fernando Wickline

Hermine Rottner

Roslyn Schmeling

Diedre Dearmore

Elinor Fritsche

Carline Aichele

Cassassa Little

Duchesne Usher

Sau Plair

Vera Piel

Harmer Tilly

Gossow Dalles

Rocio Schadel

Kostohryz Edinburgh

Alita Sligir

Tania Gunkel

Marks St. Croix

Nutcharee Mascall

Borsh Garthman

Esperanza Watts

Fernando Kondo

Gangy Ockerby

Rutman Moon

Swinton Hayes

Larabee Kint

Vernita Okula

Stalls Smithers

Peart Oakes

Hartlen Summers

Piatek Pepper

Flom Wessex

Jacqui Encarnacion

Schwipps Boone

Fay Vadya

Lorenza Riling

Clinton Otterson

Katy Lino

Previously: Twitter spam accounts with unusual names

Yeah, she totally looks like an Umphenour

I swear these are all real names (well, real names of fake people, anyway) of spam Twitter accounts who’ve @ replied me recently. They’re all so whimsically named I almost felt bad blocking and reporting them for spam! But not really.

Umphenour Carter

Illuminada Husk

Noriko Defrates

Grindeland Face

Guitreau Phipps

Maltas Lawless

Vandyk Sherwood

Bookard Dickerson

Wayson Inge

Vuono Zacher

Neelon Kendall

Rolfsen Oxford

Weinmann Drew

Flom Wessex

What delightful nomenclature! And, because Twitter’s spambots have chosen this week to launch their invasion, I guess, here’s several more:

Tremper Xent

Renfrew Ace

Yuhasz (huh?) Blaire

Pizzuto Chance

Diluca Scottman

Goldware Jackman

Baldridge Windsor

Copes Wheatley

Starnes Carew

Dear everyone who’s not into Twitter: please stop bashing Twitter.

Or at least stop bashing it via lazy criticisms which everyone’s sick of hearing, such as:

“I don’t know what Twitter is ‘for’.” You sound like an ignoramus when you say this. It’s like boasting that you don’t know what the internet is “for”.

“I don’t need to know what strangers are eating for breakfast.” If you’re following people who only tweet about what they ate for breakfast, you’re following the wrong people.

“140 characters isn’t enough to say anything substantial.” Sure it is. Try using the site.

“Hey, did you know that ‘Twitter’ sounds like ‘twit’ and ‘twat’? Let’s make puns based on this observation!” Oh ho ho. Important: The “twit”/”twat” jokes stopped being funny when vaudeville did. Joke about Twitter, but come up with  new material please. The existing stuff is as insightful as comparing Sarah Jessica Parker to a horse¹.

And when you write patronising articles like this, which treat Twitter’s users (in particular, Twitter’s female users) as superficial airheads who use the site  to gush about the trivial high-school details of their life, you sound foolish and deserved to be mocked by the internet.

Okay, sure, Twitter is a great place to gush about the trivial details of your life. But that’s not its only purpose. Much has been made about Twitter’s big-picture usefulness. But it’s a handy thing for everyday people to have in their everyday lives, too. For example: when I was slogging through the final chapters of My Book, it was nice to check into #amwriting and see that, hey, there are a lot of people working at this too, even if I don’t know any of them.

I think that’s kind of rad.

But after all these years I’m still reading articles in the MSM about “novelties” like online dating and adults who play video games – somehow I doubt the Twitter-bashing will end anytime soon.

1. Not that I think SJP is especially equine, but “She looks like a horse, hur hur” is a gag made about her that needs to be put out to pasture, pun intended. [↩]

Boneshaker I bought at the same time as Leviathan, because they were next to one another on the tables at Barnes & Noble, and I vaguely remembered reading good things about it. (I also liked the cover. Goggles! Airships! Neat typography!) It was a good purchase. This is a great book.

Cherie Priest‘s story starts off slow: it’s not immediately apparent how the plot will turn out, unless you cheated and read the blurb, and even then it’s not obvious. Early chapters introduce us to Briar Wilkes and her teenage son Zeke, and the grim 19th century version of Seattle they inhabit. By around page 50, the plot has stuck them both in a walled-up part of the city that’s crawling with zombies (dubbed “rotters” in Priest’s universe) and pirates and mad scientists. (Boing Boing has a longer, better synopsis.)

No-so-coincidentally, around page 50 is where Boneshaker hooked me.

This is an epic, page-turning, wonderful read: deftly plotted, switching between Briar and Zeke as they individually explore the horrifying, steampunk-inspired place they’ve stumbled into; written in a beautifully verbose style that matches its historical era; and just a whole lot of fun. Priest is writing at least two more books set in the same world, and while they won’t be direct sequels to Boneshaker (which is a shame – I want more of Briar and Zeke and zombie-Seattle!), I can’t wait to read them.