And similarly with Tesla. It's claimed he didn't start Tesla, which is technically true but misleading. He joined when it was 4 guys with some big ideas, but the "real" founders of the company would "leave" before Tesla's first product, The Roadster, hit production. Beyond that, electric cars were largely seen as a "radical" (as in dubious) idea at the time, with the status quo being hybrids which tended to look weird and be poor performing, more serving as a means of virtue signaling environmentalism than anything else.
Basically, it all gets back to Henry Ford. If you ask people what they want, they'd have said faster horses. When an innovator takes over a company, his ideas are going to look dumb to most people, which is why most people are not innovators.
All that said, censoring Substack looks dumb.
This is not the first or the last time a media company / social network is censoring links to its competitors. It’s not to the benefit of the users. It may look like it breaks with the spirit of twitter.
Ultimately and sadly, making a worse service when a competitor stands to benefit more from an organic cooperation via link sharing may be the strategic choice.
Blame silo strategies.
Given your username is “Freedom2”, I don’t understand how “longer tweets” makes it worth it. To me it’s all worthless if you can’t even post your words.
It's a net win over the previous government censorship and blue check system.
The issue lies with the users, as the overwhelming criticism of Elon tends to eclipse any reasonable discourse about the platform.
In my opinion, Twitter had reached a plateau and required some revitalization. As time goes on, we can expect further enhancements to emerge.