I think that would be conflating Twitter with a different type of social tool. Because Twitter has such a critical mass of users it's not surprising that they'r

I think that would be conflating Twitter with a different type of social tool. Because Twitter has such a critical mass of users it's not surprising that they're hitting some fundamental issues with internet communities, and users want to solve them on twitter instead of using a tool or platform better suited to the task of having a tightnit community or a space for discrete topic matters. > There is of course the argument that this could lead to even worse echo chambers I think it's chasing a red herring to think we can harmonize such broad points of view in the same room, so treating Twitter like a discussion platform while also trying to think of it as a broadcasted social network, you just get a lot of yelling and extremely shallow discussions. If you want in depth discussions, more than a few people is usually too many, let alone tens to hundreds to thousands. I've seen some entirely novel conversations come out of twitter, but I've seen far, far, far more shallow bullshit. It's the wrong tool. > Ah, but who am I kidding, people would much rather possess a nuke than a garden. I think you're very right here, people are afraid of not being part of the bigger conversation, and so they hesitate to find places to start their more discrete conversations elsewhere. I think that's made people forget how to have in depth discussions online, instead most topics circle around the same more broadcasted points as to not stray too far from the consensus, and accidentally disagree with their peers on the finer details.