16 ms·

Jack Dorsey Is Losing Control of Twitter

• FT_intern 10y ago
  Slightly off topic, does anyone know if the portrayal of Jack Dorsey in Hatching Twitter is accurate?
  • __abc 10y ago
    It's been so long since I read that book. How was he portrayed again? I vaguely remember it being self focused, whiney, and that his greatest product out of all that, was his self image. I could also be WAAAAAY off.
  • wiremine 10y ago
    I'm something like twitter user 1019, and joined on day 2 or 3 after it was launch. Before twitter was Odeo, a podcasting company. Their blog post announcing twitter back in the day went something like this: 1. Odeo isn't doing well. 2. We broke into small teams to brainstorm ideas. 3. Jack, one of our devs, had this idea for SMS messaging. 4. Oh, and it also had a web interface. 5. It was quick to build, so here you go (link to twitter). 6. Tell us what you think. It was, IMHO, incredibly boring at that point, and I didn't use it again for years. That's my personal recollection of how it was announced. I think history was rewritten a few times maybe? Edit: Oops, it was NOT doing well. Big difference, sorry.
    • _kyran 10y ago
      Slightly off topic again, but what was Odeo like? I see it referenced everywhere, but what exactly where they trying to do, and what worked/didn't work?
      • jonknee 10y ago
        > I see it referenced everywhere, but what exactly where they trying to do, and what worked/didn't work? It was discovery for podcasts and was destroyed when iTunes included podcasts.
        • uxp100 10y ago
          They also had Odeo messages, which was a replacement for the Seattle free Voice Mail numbers that Podcasts often used for audio feedback. For those who had a mic, but didn't want to fiddle with recording software and encoding and emailing an mp3. It was an awful flash app that rarely worked. Mostly a good way to freeze your browser.
      • wiremine 10y ago
        As mentioned, it was a discovery tool for podcasts that. I don't recall the timing with podcasting support in iTunes, but I recall them having problems before iTunes started supporting it: it didn't seem to ever have a business model. That said, it was the wild west of podcasting back then, so any discovery was helpful. I remember one of the first podcasts I listened to was just Adam Curry driving around Amsterdam smoking and swearing at people. It was pretty awesome.
      • throwaway_xx9 10y ago
        I had a chance to hear a lecture on Odeo by either Jack or one of the Odeo founders back in the day at Yahoo HQ. He looked and seemed like a typical know-nothing 20-something founder. And then Odeo was crushed and I never heard about it again.
  • angryasian 10y ago
    https://www.quora.com/How-did-Noah-Glass-get-forced-out-of-Twitter https://www.quora.com/How-did-Noah-Glass-get-forced-out-of-T... I don't see anything in the article about the hatching of twitter but you should read more about the accounts from noah glass.
  • miraj 10y ago
    Its not off-topic at all. the portrayal of Ev Williams in this article looked to me as very disingenuous & deceitful. Ev is not just another board member + co-founder. He has as much stake in seeing Twitter succeed as anyone else. Without his whole-hearted support at Odeo dont think Twitter would have gotten off the ground. We gotta remember Ev founded Blogger, before Twitter, and Medium after. So he certainly has perspectives on how communications + media evolving in the digital era. Edit: Typos + Syntax!
• kenko 10y ago
  But at least he's still got some sweet Rick Owens jackets.
• rrggrr 10y ago
  The USGOV spends roughly $90 billion a year hoping to influence or read the policy intentions of other states and non-state actors. Having shattered the wall between public and private institutions with its $11 billion dollar bailout of General Motors, why not partner with Blackstone Group and take Twitter private? The company's value in advancing US interests is immense and that value will die a swift death in Disney's hands.
  • jdavis703 10y ago
    Doesn't Disney also export American values, similar to say CNN's contribution to the "soft power" mantra?
• sigmar 10y ago
  Why are all the photos shaded blue? I thought I had highlighted it by accident.
  • ihsw 10y ago
    Artistic license.
  • throwaway40483 10y ago
    This is a reference to the Twitter blue bird logo. But yeah, it also caught me by surprise at first.
  • jccalhoun 10y ago
    me too. i was clicking off to the side to try to unselect it
• 27182818284 10y ago
  There is only a finite amount of energy a person has and a finite amount of hours awake, you know? I can't imagine trying to re-steer Twitter while also being an effective CEO at a place like Square.
  • patwalls 10y ago
    Elon Musk. /s
    • rdl 10y ago
      Elon has some awesome lieutenants; Shotwell at SpaceX being the best example, who is essentially Tim Cook or Sheryl Sandberg level. That clearly has never existed at Twitter (does/did exist at Square when Keith Rabois was there; not sure about Square now but probably.)
      • FussyZeus 10y ago
        Right but Elon put them there. Part of being a leader is recognizing when you have too much shit to do and finding people you trust, are qualified and delegating tasks to them.
        • rdl 10y ago
          Absolutely. If we were to start cataloguing the ways Jack Dorsey is not Elon Musk we'd be here for a long time.
      • mulcahey 10y ago
        JB Straubel at Tesla too
    • agumonkey 10y ago
      Who else thinks Musk has turned into self spreading machine with a broken PID ?
    • 27182818284 10y ago
• ihsw 10y ago
  I would love to have more privacy-focused features and more distance from the whole "everything's public" mantra -- following a user without anyone else knowing, following a user for only a specific hashtag, private-only hashtags. The whole "everything's public or everything's private" shtick just doesn't work for me.
  • harryh 10y ago
    You can create a private list and add people to that instead of following them publicly. The UX isn't the best, but it works.
    • danielweber 10y ago
      A bad UX for privacy-critical features is worse than nothing. I don't want to be privately talking with someone and worry that it might be public to the world because I checked something wrong.
      • harryh 10y ago
        Oh ya, I hear you. All kinds of problems! Was just trying to be helpful for ihsw if they wanted to muddle through.
  • CodeMage 10y ago
    How I wish hashtags were actually useful. One of the things I hoped to get out of Twitter when I started using it was the ability to follow my favorite authors and hear more about their public appearances (e.g. book signing), progress on new books, release dates and such. Instead, I got "Facebook grade" stuff: look at this funny video, my spouse/child/buddy said something witty, here's some politics/activism in 140 characters, etc. Eventually, I lost interest in Twitter. This is a pervasive problem in social media: signal-to-noise ratio is awful.
• Zikes 10y ago
  Twitter keeps ignoring what its users want, and pushing ridiculous features nobody asked for. Keep the timeline chronological! Instead of injecting 12 hour old tweets into my timeline randomly, give me a tab of popular tweets by people I follow. Give me more options to discover interesting discussions. Let me subscribe to or follow hashtags. Give me more options for filtering out the noise. Let me provide hashtags or keywords I don't care about. Back before Twitter made the decision to transition from a service to a platform, there were Twitter apps and clients that provided all kinds of great ways to interact with Twitter. But Twitter shut them down, and never bothered to integrate the things that made them great into the official Twitter platform or apps. Twitter's greatest potential is as a firehose of live data. Give users the tools to use and personalize that data and Twitter will become an indispensable part of people's daily lives.
  • rdiddly 10y ago
    It does rather boggle the mind how staunchly they refuse to get the basics down. Recent initiatives are misplaced. It's like they're building a bicycle that has heated hand-grips, an espresso machine and a stereo system, but no seat. And then mr. visionary there, instead of noticing the failures in delivery of the core experience, instead starts asking "are we limiting our users' transportation options by making them be on a 2-wheeled self-propelled device?" In other words, hey let's reconsider the ONE THING WE'RE ACTUALLY ABOUT... the Tweet. I mean if you want to kill off the company there are easier ways.
  • cgag 10y ago
    I found a tweet from 2015 via google and wanted to see the surrounding discussion. I couldn't find a way, so I tried just holding page down on the feed, trying to infinitely scroll my way to it. After around 5 minutes it stopped loading tweets. Oh well. edit: I meant this to be a reply to the "failure to handle the basics" post.
    • Zikes 10y ago
      There's no way to refresh a tweet in the Android app to load new replies, either. Even if I leave that tweet and come back to it, it often only pulls up locally cached replies. And the replies are often neither chronological nor threaded in any meaningful way. I know the 140 character limit strongly discourages meaningful discussion, but I'm starting to think they believe that every single tweet should stand alone. That replies, likes, and retweets are nothing more than a metric to judge the quality or interestingness of an individual tweet.
• gdulli 10y ago
  > The company has been rolling out products faster than ever, she noted, and has boosted engagement through enhancements to the timeline, such as showing people the most relevant tweets first. The endeavor that drove me, a passionate user for several years, off the site for good. It's sad that they watered themselves down to become a second-place Facebook. Maybe it's not even their fault, and it's just a side effect of being a public company and being measured by growth instead of by the uniqueness and quality of the product. It's still sad. When the dust settles, there will be lesson in the danger of engagement-metric based product design. Twitter has a "while you were away" feature that shows you their idea of the tweets they'd like you to see first. (Even if you return to the site 5 minutes after your last session.) (This is different from the non-chronological timeline, and doesn't get turned off when you disable that.) When you dismiss it, it asks you if you'd like to see less of that. It's completely ambiguous and unexplained whether they're asking whether you disliked those specific tweets or the non-chronological aspect of the timeline. A lot of users have been vocal about hating the feature. By dismissing it are they actually burying certain friends down further on their timeline? Who knows? Some people are guessing correctly what the meaning is, but others aren't. They're feeding a certain amount of garbage input into their algorithms.
  • vvanders 10y ago
    I hate that feature so much, I keep telling it to go away and it just keeps coming back.
    • flavien_bessede 10y ago
      You can disable it in your settings, if you hated it so much you would have spent the 30 seconds it takes to get rid of it :)
      • gdulli 10y ago
        Read my post, that isn't true.
        • 10y ago
• h4nkoslo 10y ago
  It's fair to say you've lost control, when the Saudi royal family owns more of the company than you do.
• Animats 10y ago
  Well, one would hope so. Fortunately, Twitter doesn't have one of those "president for life" two-class stock setups like Google and Facebook. The stockholders can fire Dorsey when necessary. The post-growth phase of a social network doesn't have to mean its collapse. Look at IAC, InterActive Corp (iac.com, ticker IAC). They run a lot of sites - Vimeo, Ask, About, Investopedia, Tinder, OKCupid, etc. - have a market cap of about $5 billion, and keep plugging along. They were started by Barry Diller, the creator of the Home Shopping Channel, something else that keeps plugging along. Diller is still CEO. IAC is boring but useful. Twitter doesn't have to "exit"; they're already publicly held. They just have to trim down to a profitable and stable level, and accept that they're post-growth.
  • happyslobro 10y ago
    This! A thousand times this. Investors know that infinite growth in a finite environment is impossible. But, they always seem to expect that their project should be an exception, or at least, it should push everything else aside and take the world for itself. Can't we all just get along? I propose that we call this the Scarface effect: "The world is not enough."
    • erispoe 10y ago
      I think this is the fundamental misunderstanding about growth, one that is generally carried by post-growth and deep ecology people. The growth we're talking about here is growth of economic value, not growth of resource consumption. Yes, resources are finite (oil, total attention time of people), but economic value is not. Entrepreneurs are in this game to create more and more economic value from the same finite resources. Take time: people have roughly the same time now than they had 40 years ago. Yet, we create way more economic value out of this time than 40 years ago, because our productivity has gone up. Resources are finite, economic value is potentially infinite. Therefore, yes, you can have virtually infinite growth of economic value.
      • ksrm 10y ago
        > economic value is potentially infinite Do you mind explaining how? I'm not sure I understand.
• samfisher83 10y ago
  Maybe this is what Twitter is. It Generates a couple billion in revenue. Instead of trying to grow how about shrinking the costs. If a company can consistently generate a billion dollar in cash flow that is pretty good. They don't need to have 4000 employees. Maybe they need to go down to 2000,1000 or 500. Maybe you won't be able to get the best talent, but I am sure you can find some people to run it.
  • cloudjacker 10y ago
    I agree, people have wildly different perceptions from me, and I think their perceptions are tied to stock performance, instead of the fundamentals of whats going on here. They have created a money printing machine in the middle of San Francisco. They have 4,000 employees creating continual dilution in the stock and dumping it onto your mom's 401k every single day, and the market still retains a 17 billion market cap. That is printing money pretty freaking well! Twitter is a success story, in this light, and will have even rosier fundamentals when if it has 1/10th the market cap and 1/3rd the employees.
    • leereeves 10y ago
      > Twitter is a success story, in this light, and will have even rosier fundamentals when if it has 1/10th the market cap and 1/3rd the employees. And what would a 90% loss in Twitter stock do to tech stocks in general? Would that be enough to cause another bubble to burst?
      • cloudjacker 10y ago
        It would be no different from the story of one venture capital firm marking down the valuation of some other portfolio company. Also King and Zynga have had performance like that. At the end of the day we are just talking about several billion dollars in valuation. The S&P500 returns 1 trillion to shareholders annually. If capital interest in the tech sector is really that fickle, then there's no need to kick the can. San Francisco is begging to return to the "good ole' days" where there was no industry Sounds like a net positive
• david927 10y ago
  In my opinion this isn't about Dorsey but about Twitter. In 1984, Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus unveiled a unicorn. Later investigation revealed it to be a goat with its horns fused together.
  • thieving_magpie 10y ago
    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/10/2f/e1/102fe1905b27fbc962a9a6f9e867c89f.jpg https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/10/2f/e1/102fe1905... That's hilarious.
    • agumonkey 10y ago
      Do not click http://www.villagevoice.com/news/heres-the-hideous-goat-creature-ringling-bros-claimed-was-a-unicorn-in-1985-6667020 http://www.villagevoice.com/news/heres-the-hideous-goat-crea...
  • hrxn 10y ago
    Great metaphor for Twitter, actually. Nice.
• baccheion 10y ago
  Twitter needs to do the following: - Replace their mediocre management team (3.2 rating on Glassdoor, versus a threshold of 4.0 or a "damn, management's good" of 4.2) with people that actually know what they're doing - Replace their mediocre management team (3.2 rating on Glassdoor, versus a threshold of 4.0 or a "damn, management's good" of 4.2) with people that actually know what they're doing - Replace their mediocre management team (3.2 rating on Glassdoor, versus a threshold of 4.0 or a "damn, management's good" of 4.2) with people that actually know what they're doing - Replace their mediocre management team (3.2 rating on Glassdoor, versus a threshold of 4.0 or a "damn, management's good" of 4.2) with people that actually know what they're doing - Replace their mediocre management team (3.2 rating on Glassdoor, versus a threshold of 4.0 or a "damn, management's good" of 4.2) with people that actually know what they're doing - Reduce the number of employees to 1,555 - Hire an additional 259-585 quality people (engineers and designers, mainly) to fix user experience and engineering issues - Start paying attention to the user base and deliver what's actually needed - Innovate and push things forward, rather than settling into stagnation and decline There's really not much to it. Twitter is only having problems because they keep messing up, stagnating, or doing the dumbest things.
  • tarancato 10y ago
    What the hell is with those numbers? Is it a joke I don't get?
    • baccheion 10y ago
      What numbers?
      • tarancato 10y ago
        1,555 employees, for example, why that and not 1,500
        • baccheion 10y ago
          It's based on some arbitrary thing I did some time ago to determine how large a company should be (6-8 reports per manager and N layers of management; 1 layer = 1 + 6 + 6 * 6 = 43, 2 layers = 1 + 6 + 6 * 6 + 6 * 6 * 6 = 259, 3 layers = 1 + 6 + 6 * 6 + 6 * 6 * 6 + 6 * 6 * 6 * 6 = 1555, 4 layers = 9331, etc). As Twitter seems to be twice as large as it needs to be (3898 vs. 1949) and as it's obvious more people will need to be hired after any cuts, I arbitrarily chose 1555 and 259/585 (same number of layers, but 8 reports, rather than 6) as the numbers since they add up to about 2000.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• mtgx 10y ago
  This along with the recent bidding could explain why Twitter is "suddenly" not censoring anti-Hillary/pro-Trump trending topics anymore. They didn't want anymore negative press about it when the negotiations started.
  • venomsnake 10y ago
    With the internet split halfway in the current culture war you cannot make money from only half of the audience.
    • Mao_Zedang 10y ago
      That isnt stopping them from trying.
• superlad 10y ago
  This is the reason Jack Dorsey's return was doomed to failure. He was half-time and didn't take control like a general commanding troops must. He was the Executive Officer but he was not a Chief Executive Officer. For someone in this position, the natural human incentive is to build consensus and avoid ruffling feathers. An employee revolt could have gotten him fired. He had to worry what people thought. Steve Job's return to Apple was dominating. He absolutely worked more than anyone else and ran circles around anyone trying to get in his way. And he fired people and replaced the board with friends. Things people would have faulted him for had he not had time to see his plans through. But..even if he had gone full-time and led a successful coup, he probably would have still failed. Twitter was truly an accident and so no one really knows what it is.
• jordache 10y ago
  i don't use twitter because i have no idea what my user/pass is. They should just allow authentication via FB
• hrxn 10y ago
  The sooner Twitter dies the better...
• ryanmarsh 10y ago
  I hope you're all happy when the product gets fingerbanged to death by legions of mediocre corporate managers at whichever soulless quarterly-earnings addicted too-lobbied-to-fail corporate institution acquires them, just so the financiers can get their fucking Twitter check. If Twitter didn't change a fucking thing for the rest of my life I'd still use it and love it. Forever.
  • brandnewlow 10y ago
    It loses money and stopped growing a long time ago. The product you love is unsustainable unfortunately.
    • wyclif 10y ago
      It's only unsustainable because they refuse to cut back and do what the top comment on this page talks about: run Twitter like a post-growth company. There's nothing wrong with the product that cannot be fixed. The problem is that investors are demanding unrealistic growth and dividends.
  • sidlls 10y ago
    What if they charged you a fee, say a monthly or annual subscription?
    • ryanmarsh 10y ago
      Worth it.
  • geoffbrown2014 10y ago
    Serious question, can you tell me how you use it in a way that you love it? Maybe I'm using it wrong, but I find it to be one more thing on the list of shit I gotta do today. I receive so little value in my day to day life that its barely worth it.
• yuhong 10y ago
  As a side note, I have been thinking of Yishan-style CEOs for a while now, with board of directors tweeting often too. Twitter itself would probably be a good candidate for such a public company.
  • dilemma 10y ago
    >I have been thinking of Yishan-style CEOs for a while now, with board of directors tweeting often too. What does this mean?
    • yuhong 10y ago
      I am thinking of Yishan Wong, formerly of Reddit.
• yeukhon 10y ago
  Maybe he needs to stop managing both Square and Twitter at the same time.
• perseusprime11 10y ago
  It does speak volumes of Twitter that even Google and Facebook want to keep distance. Is it because there is nothing to see here? no product that works meaningfully?
• nostrademons 10y ago
  Wow. They really are Yahoo. Founders take a back-seat in the midst of hyper-growth. Outside management team sourced from other industries (CFO of the NFL, for a tech company?). Product pivot into believing they're a media company. Eclipsed by newer technologies. Founder CEO returns amidst flat stock performance and boardroom turmoil. Exploring a sale to other big companies, who can't afford it because the market cap is too inflated. Talk of needing a turnaround CEO. Maybe they should hire Marissa Mayer. I hear she'll be looking for a job in the near future, and she's got plenty of relevant experience.
  • geodel 10y ago
    Yes, MM can redesign Twitter bird in an all night Hackathon and that can put twitter again in hyper growth mode.
    • dredmorbius 10y ago
      More purple.
  • DominikR 10y ago
    Yahoo is even now more profitable and successful than Twitter ever was. I guess Yahoo is only perceived as such a failure because they could have been Google, but the numbers themselves do not look bad. They are making money for almost 2 decades now.
  • rokhayakebe 10y ago
    It is much easier to write comments like these than to do 1/10th of what these people have accomplished.
    • nostrademons 10y ago
      Very true, but that applies to basically everything written on this site. I'm actually semi-serious with my comment (Mayer would probably make the perfect CEO for Twitter), but nobody in a decision-making position will ever see it.
• erdevs 10y ago
  Turnarounds are super hard. A year isn't long enough and Dorsey would have been wise to both set expectations clearly that this is a 3+ year trek as well as lock in some protective provisions around that timeline. Given the actual state of affairs though, the Board has a clear fiduciary duty to consider all options. Since Dorsey didn't give himself enough time to actually effect a true fundamental product/vision turnaround, he would've been far wiser to simply focus on driving revenue as a first step. Then circle back to product later. It seems the strategy here was either unclear or unrealistic.
• laic_sir 10y ago
  TWTR has such much potential, there is not single day goes by that I won't hear Twitter's name been mentioned in some news or on TV. With Donald Trump as your Chief Marketing Officer for free, working day and night diligently, how could you not grow your user number? The only reason you are not growing user number is you have an inferior user experience comparing with Facebook/Snapchat. That is something really easy to fix by just copying what other guys are doing better, but Dorsey did nothing. He lost interest long ago. TWTR does not need to sell, just need someone who is passionate, maybe a good engineer who knows the product.
• 0003 10y ago
  Noto is just dominating hacker news lately.
• mucker 10y ago
  Twitter where free speech isn't. There will be replacements and Twitter knows it.
  • Mao_Zedang 10y ago
    It would be interesting to see how much twitters war against feelings and words is effecting their bottom line.
    • mucker 10y ago
      Indeed it would. It seems that after every purge they've fallen a bit farther. It seems very odd, on a platform dedicated to short witted public screeds, that they would get offended by...short witted screeds. Oh well.
• epalm 10y ago
  Serious question, I'm genuinely not trolling here. How can Twitter (or any other social site) be expected to maintain a high rate of new users, forever? After the first few hundred million users, wouldn't one expect new registrations to slow down a bit?
  • pharrlax 10y ago
    There just aren't enough eggs shouting into the void at random celebrities.
• nashashmi 10y ago
  Twitter and Snapchat need to merge. But their stock prices are hyperinflated. The businesses are very similar. The products are similar. The trends are similar. Even the demographics are similar. It is a shame that Twitter can't be more, when it totally needs to be more. And snapchat can do so much better too. But the problem might be they are tripping over the problems in front of them, not pursuing solutions to problems that lie ahead.
• perseusprime11 10y ago
  “Jack is a good entrepreneur,” Slingerlend said. “But Twitter needs a turnaround CEO, and that’s a completely different job.” I am not sure if I agree with the above conclusion that Twitter needs a turnaround CEO. I think Twitter needs to fully execute the live streaming strategy and see where they go from there and Jack needs to become a full time CEO and handoff Square to somebody else. Bring Mark Zuckerburg on to the board so they start learning how to execute on social. These are some small changes they can make to win back investors and win back some credibility.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• puppetmaster3 10y ago
  Here is the legacy of Jack and Twitter, ex 1: Dilbert creator: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-03/dilbert-creator-scott-adams-shadowbanned-twitter-after-trump-support http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-03/dilbert-creator-sco... How much traffic is that? Ex: 2 Milo. Etc. So... what business is he in?
• baccheion 10y ago
  On another note, I don't know why the Bay Area is so obsessed with cheesy. I mean, they do the most cliche, cheesy, predictable things in this regard, then try to poorly hype it as "profound and visionary thinking." They keep trying to recreate the magic that happened with Steve Jobs in 1997, for example. And they keep failing. They probably aren't even really trying to recreate the magic, just trying to associate themselves with it and use that to take credit for what happened in that case. This is the kind of twisted backward stupid logic that was prevalent in the area while I was there (2008 - 2011). It was just more BS every time. I mean, if you are trying to recreate the magic or emulate what's been done in the past, then do that, rather than do the dumbest things, then try to poorly and illogically spin it (in the most tired, played out, and "has never been successful" way) to look like something else. Add to that the overrepresented judger (MBTI) population, and you have a recipe for the shht of everything past constantly repeating in the worst way, as arrogant egotistical self-centered know-nothing idiots use it to try to credit themselves with being something other than the dumbest shht.
  • bravo22 10y ago
    For the same reason Hollywood promotes "Glamour", "Celebrities" and fawns over them on the red carpet. Gotta feed the machine with the bright-eyed and the impressionable.
  • bravo22 10y ago
    For the same reason Hollywood promotes "Glamour", "Celebrities" and fawns over them on the red carpet. Gotta feed the machine with the bright-eyed and the impressionable.
• ry4n413 10y ago
  ouch
• ry4n413 10y ago
  ouch
• norea-armozel 10y ago
  The biggest problem I think is that they constantly add features that don't improve the core functionality. For example, Moments really don't help with hashtag filtering, conversation searching, and the like. All they need to do is make it easier to filter conversations, basically. It's not that hard to see why that would get more people on board since they could make sense of their time line. But it seems Dorsey and company would rather just pile on stuff that's not related to that. I don't get their motivation for this. Can someone can explain it?