Well, you start by acknowledging that by hosting hundreds of millions of people to your platform, you're also hosting the real world problems that come with the

Well, you start by acknowledging that by hosting hundreds of millions of people to your platform, you're also hosting the real world problems that come with them. And how you handle that a scale while mitigating the consequences turns into a nightmare. Rather then evolving along with the needs of their users, Twitter froze it's functionality years ago. Twitter could have added a range of moderation tools, allow users to opt-out from re-tweets, trends and such, allowed people to create groups and communities, foster active cooperation with key users and it's communities,... Why didn't that happen? Because those hundreds of millions of users aren't paying customers. Investing in all of those things simply isn't worth the investment or pressing enough in terms of optimizing for revenue through advertising and business intelligence. An audience is a valuable commodity, and so what Twitter doesn't want is risk losing that commodity. Tweaking the functionality of the platform is such a risk. However, hosting hundreds of millions of people who aren't customers, is also a huge liability. Worst case is having governments representing those poeple imposing hard regulatory frameworks that hurt revenue and profitability. In a way, it's akin to the lions of the circus. People pay good money to see the lions perfom, but the circus has to accept the risks that come with keeping lions. Which includes getting shut down because the lions escaped and went to town. So, why does Twitter cater to hundreds of millions of people, and why does the circus keep lions? Because the profits they gain from doing so outmatch the risks they have to accept. Getting back to your original question, Twitter is basically Humanity's stream of consciousness materialized. It's prohibitively expensive, and rather utopian, to be able to moderate that in a meaningful way which caters to everyone's contentment. By contrast, Twitter's aspiration isn't to provide the best moderation, it's to implement just the bare minimum in order to not lose it's value. Looking back at the blogpost, you'll find that most of what they propose is tweaks to how they filter content and a small tweak to how you do re-tweeting based on existing functionality. No fundamental changes to the feature set are put into place. On the scale of Twitter's operation, that's mainly targetting low hanging fruit since introducing more substantial changes would be a huge gamble that might end up hurting the business.