Ask HN: Did Twitter's 280-character limit improve discourse?
Imo, Twitter's 280-character constraint made ideas sharper and forced people to share high-density knowledge. Not sure it was a good idea removing it as a pro feature
3 comments
I'd argue it's the opposite. It's very hard to express anything nuanced in that space and when you try people go bezerk and call you a "reply guy" or hit the block button or argue with the admins that you should be banned, etc.
The content beyond the limit still collapses with a Show More; I think it works to still keep things short when they can be short but allow for more explanation for posts that need it. I like the change.
Discourse quality is 99.9999% a trust/safety/moderation policy and tooling outcome. Content can be problematic on any of dozens of dimensions (tone/energy/relevance down to actual criminal consequences) at any size. Whether conversations retain signal and communities develop and grow trust entirely depends on what decisions moderation does or does not make.
Did shorter content chunks simplify the moderation problem, in the context of an org that wanted to build communities? Absolutely. Does Twitter post Elon have completely (completely) different goals and values? Of course, yes, opposite end of the spectrum. What relative percentage of resources does Elon twitter devote to moderation? Maybe 1%. So is it obvious that conversations are going to be completely different and lower "quality"? Yes, yes it is. That is a goal.
Did shorter content chunks simplify the moderation problem, in the context of an org that wanted to build communities? Absolutely. Does Twitter post Elon have completely (completely) different goals and values? Of course, yes, opposite end of the spectrum. What relative percentage of resources does Elon twitter devote to moderation? Maybe 1%. So is it obvious that conversations are going to be completely different and lower "quality"? Yes, yes it is. That is a goal.