[mattbrewsbytes]

Twitter isn't a publicly traded company anymore but is still a company that can receive lawsuits. If anything will be changing they need to start with the Terms Of Service since that is the set of rules that a web company uses to govern users, what they do with their data, etc. and what might be challenged in courts.

If the TOS changes to allow a lot more content that was previously prohibited, un-ban users, etc. we may find out where actual laws may or may not apply to purely user driven content and what party can be held accountable should actions happen as the result of content.

I would expect him to do things to try and get back the $44B he spent/borrowed to purchase. Un-banning people could get more eyeballs and that is ad money. It may be a short term play to increase ad revenue, un-ban people, let them run amok to get more eyeballs until lawsuits or Federal organizations step in - with the goal of extracting as much of the $44B as he can.

If they built the ability to have private groups with a simple timeline based feed with ads on the side (i.e. not in the main feed) they could probably steal a ton of users from FB. Go back to basics - people wanting to share things with people they know while also allowing them to view the circus that is public social media. I would be very surprised if this happens. I'm more expecting what I said above - let people run amok until some entity says no or the lawsuit settlements are greater than the run amok profits.

[TheLoafOfBread]

Another thing which I expect to happen (in order to drive revenue up) would be more Facebook-like approach of walled garden, that you won't be able to even see tweets, unless you are logged in. If I am not wrong, then goodbye Nitter.