21–30 of 373 posts
Remove the ability to have followers from world leaders, remove the ability to be liked from world leaders' tweets. Keep the ability to retweet world leaders' tweets, but prevent retweets to be added more from the retweeters.
What would it mean to not allow followers on Twitter?
Marketing tip: Always ask the public for input and consult with "experts" before doing what you intended to all along.
Almost like act first, ask permission later.
Pretty simple IMO.
While on first sight, I find it applaudable that Twitter cares and wants to learn, I think it's not in their responsibility anymore to moderate. They've proven to be incapable and overwhelmed about making legitimate decisions. They should get regulated and they should stop regulating.
I think this is just a PR stunt, nothing will change that isn’t already planned before this public input session. Move along, status quo.
I would suggest that besides concentrating on the world leader issue that Twitter consider some sort of expiration, short at that, for all tweets so as to put down this revenge/vengeance oriented the woke have created. people complain about fake news and rightly so but the cycle of hatred that results from these purity tests applied to anyone because of past tweets is worse
Logistically it’s infeasible. Someone will create a database of archived tweets, or screenshots will circle the web. Etc.
Remove the ability to have followers from world leaders, remove the ability to be liked from world leaders' tweets. Keep the ability to retweet world leaders' tweets, but prevent retweets to be added more from the retweeters.
> "whether or not they believe world leaders should be subject to the same rules as others on Twitter".
E.g. Twitter in 2020 was rife with "inciting violence" but largely depending on your point of view/politics, and if it was "justified". Etc.
Marketing tip: Always ask the public for input and consult with "experts" before doing what you intended to all along.