> RSS actually meant, mostly, that you had to have something worthy of RSS'ing ... a blog, an article, something.
Exactly this! I really miss the time of the internet before social media, when it was more about quality content then clickbait articles. I was a heavy user of Google Reader until it got shut down, but couldn't find any worthy alternative, so I used Twitter as a news feed reader from then on. It's ok, but it's hard to ignore the noise sometimes.
Twitter? any old Joe can just post some bullsh!t that marinated in their minds for -0.5 seconds and that just gets added to Twitter and potentially my timeline.
Yes, RSS is far better than Twitter for some uses. Uses that are actually of value.