Twitter devalued its top status symbol and what it can do now

Re:Twitter devalued its top status symbol and what it can do... by not_a_shill on Thursday April 06, 2023 @03:04PM (#35472896)

>You want the "elites" on the platform otherwise your lurkers, who make up 90% of the DAU will have nothing to read.

I don't think this is even true. I know the stats you're talking about on posters vs lurkers, but that's orthogonal to blue checks. I can't imagine there was a high percentage of blue checks that got one via being notable on Twitter itself.

Ex: Can you name anyone on tiktok you'd have considered notable before the app blew up? Yet it is the hottest social media platform out there. These people are largely replaceable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter devalued its top status symbol and what it can do... by nemothekid on Thursday April 06, 2023 @04:10PM (#35473692)

>Can you name anyone on tiktok you'd have considered notable before the app blew up?

I don't think you are giving enough credit to TikTok here. TikTok was able to break into the space using algorithmic discovery; they didn't need to spend a ton on content and were able to surface content people want to watch.

That said, verification came out in 2009, three years after the launch of Twitter itself.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter devalued its top status symbol and what it can do... by not_a_shill on Saturday April 08, 2023 @11:19AM (#35494086)

I'm giving all the credit to the tiktok platform by saying the addition of the "elites" wouldn't have made any difference. They can build up people organically. They don't have to pander to the traditional elites at all.

I might have been missing the point of your post though. I thought it was saying that you want the elites whereas I'm saying they don't really matter if you can make discoverability on your platform decent.

[ Parent | on HN ]