> Lastly he probably also had/has some WeChat ambitions.
Years ago I remember reading something about the Chinese microblogging sites and it was mentioned "these sites also have a character limits. However, b/c in Chinese a character can be an entire word, the 'word limits' are much longer."
Moving to the 4000 character limit feels very much a response to the above.
This is my problem with Twitter. It's not meant for serious discussion. We have blogs for that. Nobody wants to read it for an interesting article about geopolitics- foreignaffairs.com already exists. Know your audience.
What exactly is it meant for then if not serious discussion?
> We have blogs for that.
You mean the one sided discussions? Also not every thought is worthy of a blog post, but is worthy of being put out there.
> Nobody wants to read it for an interesting article about geopolitics- foreignaffairs.com already exists
Geopolitics isn't the only thing longer convos are for... The problem with pre-Musk/4000 char limit Twitter is that nuances are heavily lost because of the lack of characters and that nobody wants to do thread storms.
Well it was created so we could all tell everyone what we were having for lunch. It took a few years before someone tried having anything resembling serious discussion.
Well, at the time of the pandemic, our prime minister tweeted important changes to policies to have effect in the next few days.
Whether or not that was what the platform was meant for, it was what it was. And as far as I heard, our country was not the only one where this was happening.
Years ago I remember reading something about the Chinese microblogging sites and it was mentioned "these sites also have a character limits. However, b/c in Chinese a character can be an entire word, the 'word limits' are much longer."
Moving to the 4000 character limit feels very much a response to the above.