Downstream of where the quality discourse is happening and a lagging indicator of future success.

There’s no disputing twitter is the king but the more interesting question is will it continue to be.

Especially as it leans into debate as a metric for discourse. But if they incentivize for it then it might lead to arguments for the sake of arguing which would be lower quality discourse sort of like empty calories.

Or it might not. But that’s the real leading indicator and I’m curious what a good metric might be of quality discourse. Some mix of length of messages per thread and length of thread. Or presence of “domain experts” in the thread.

Measuring this and optimizing for it wins you the next decade at least I think.

Twitter is upstream of all other social networks for "the discourse".

All the "shadowy cabal chat groups" are 80% "post link to tweet and discuss".

Only way to "beat" Twitter is play a different game. 

New composable primitives powered by crypto (which make it harder for incumbents to copy).

Channels that enable cozy corners yet are public, permissionless and composable.

Not denying the what twitter is or the how to beat it. Just thinking through how you might empirically measure to find a leading indicator.

Cozy corners and crypto primitives are the what. The why is quality discussions. A level deeper might be new insights or new bonds. Which is why the url to irl pipeline is so powerful.