> The... dozens?... of us who have a burner account but don't use Twitter regularly and have no interest in doing so probably can't be bothered to log in to re

> The... dozens?... of us who have a burner account but don't use Twitter regularly and have no interest in doing so probably can't be bothered to log in to read what you're writing. This right here is why this doesn't matter. Those "dozens?" of people are a drop in the bucket relative to the overall distribution these people are getting on Twitter. > Twitter could delete your posts for any reason, or no reason, at any time(*). Given the ongoing Twitter-Musk struggle and Twitter's generally dubious financial outlook, this is not idle alarmist speculation. This also misses the point of Twitter. Twitter threads aren't meant to be blog posts. They're meant to be ephemeral and in-the-moment. They're passed around for a few days or weeks and then mostly forgotten, with a few exceptions. Blog writers will scoff at the idea, but Twitter writers have embraced this dynamic and made the most of it. I think the core error is trying to equate Twitter threads to blog posts on a different platform. They're not. They're different formats with different use cases and different target audiences. Dropping a blog post into a Twitter thread wouldn't make for great reading, just as dropping a Twitter thread into a blog template usually looks out of place and incomplete. People write to their audience and they write for the platform. There's a place for both Twitter threads and blogs, but we don't have to pick one or the other as the sole source of distribution.