[talldayo]

> I believe his version of twitter was the closest thing we could get to an "uncensored" twitter.

I mean... I don't agree with that, considering that BlueSky exists now. I never used either of Dorsey's social medias but I would argue BlueSky is fundamentally closer to uncensored than X or Twitter ever was.

> How can anyone dismiss Twitter earning >$5B in revenue as something not viable?

Because their expenditures were through the roof, and even running it on a skeleton team a-la X seems to be losing money hand over fist. Twitter could have contented themselves with lower revenue, but they'd have to redesign their product stack or find ways to make more money elsewhere. Both of those take time and burn goodwill with the community.

At the end of the day, as a lifelong outsider to Twitter, it's just an endlessly ironic fate for the site. I have no love for Elon Musk but I also don't see Jack Dorsey as some messianic genius. The dude sold out his site in his final years because he failed to operate it for a decade and couldn't force people onto his crypto bandwagon. He never tried to correct course on Twitter (instead funding BlueSky as a contingency) and basically left his userbase to suffer as a value-add to his stock package. When I hear people complain about how bad Twitter is I just imagine frogs sitting in a boiling pot asking why their legs are numb. Do we really have to go over this again?