The reason that twitter became "the place where a nobody could talk to an expert" (at the time it wasn't the place to mob experts) was the utter design failure of email against spam. Nowadays people don't publish their email address publicly and spam filters are likely to silently delete the message you sent.

(Twitter is a failure too, now)

The moment it was purchased by an individual, it became a symbol of those who believe single individuals (with money) should hold that kind of power.

I'm seeing a lot of email surviving right now. Especially plain text emails. Refuses to die, one of the most neutral protocols after IP and DNS

Wikipedia is definitely not a public square. It is an encyclopedia. What you said, about it being

>like a library with steep rules

is entirely correct. That doesn't make it bad, not at all! You're right: There are very few equivalents of a public square, digitally. I consider HN to be one, even more so than email. Email chains get awkward with multiple people, and email addresses are (of necessity, due to spam, like others already said) non-public.

Agree that it is not a square, but I meant more in the sense that it is public. It has GPL, Creative Commons, 501 c 3.

The thing with social media of that type is that it is often filled with foss devs who are a very narrow point demographics.

The chans and reddit have some public properties. I hear the bluesky and mastodon things (the latter especially) have very public infrastructures, not sure about the people, it feels like it will be left leaning democrats on the first hand and FOSS devs on the latter.