[SuperCynical]

Excuse my slight condescending tone, but I don't think he really understands what twitter is for, and who benefits from its service. The model explained, which was tried by app.net, doesn't coincide with the real idea behind twitter in the first place.

A neighbor once said to me, we should pay to use the sidewalks in our city; I don't think she understood the ramifications of such a move, but it made sense in her mind because she /could/ pay for the sidewalk and the model worked for her. -yet she didn't understand that the sidewalk wasn't even necessarily meant for her. The same sides she paces, kids use to travel to school everyday, homeless persons use to panhandle, families use to travel to work everyday, and every once in a while some lune is up there with a sign expressing their view.

Twitter is no different. Sure we use twitter to post about our latest projects and greatest food pictures, however somewhere someone is using twitter to alert his friends that government and police are encroaching the neighborhood, quick alerting those near about a wildfire, or trying to start

Just because you could pay for want, doesn't mean someone else has the means to pay for necessity. I don't mind sharing a common good/service even though I know someone else might not be paying the same amount as I.

[mhurron]

> I don't think he really understands what twitter is for

I can't really hold that against anyone since I can't figure out what it's for ether.

> she didn't understand that the sidewalk wasn't even necessarily meant for her. ... homeless persons use to panhandle, ... and every once in a while some lune is up there with a sign expressing their view.

She probably fully knew this and this was exactly what she was trying to prevent.

Basically, just like this from elsewhere in the comments -

> I would pay for Twitter as well. Though it would be a huge backlash, I think it would clean things up quite a bit.