They key thing to remember is there is a window of opportunity for a startup to come up with a replacement for Twitter that embraces and extends its existing UX. I propose that a startup cherrypicks the best UX elements of Usenet so you give users what they don’t even realize what they want.
One issue is, instead of little banner ads, you could have very specific full-page ads woven into a thread on a subject where users could buy goods and services without going to a new Website. That’s where you would make your money and that’s what would make the whole thing worthwhile.
A use case would be that a user creates a very-specific Group devoted to, say their favorite TV show — maybe The Last of Us.
It would be one of many other similar Groups devoted to the show. But through data mining, you would know what people in that Group were interested in and you would place a full page ad in such a way that it would be unavoidable as people were going through the thread.
Remember, because the basic building block of this proposed service would be full page Posts with in-lining editing, that really expands what you could do with ads.
I’ve finally concluded that I’m totally and completely wasting my time to think about this idea anymore, and, yet I have gotten at least one ping in my Webstats related to this, so, lulz, let’s waste some MORE time.
Also, it definitely seems as though there is a very, very narrow window of opportunity for someone to actually implement this idea. I’m a dreamer and a writer so, as such, it’s better if I just stick to working on my novel(s) rather than spending years learning how to code something that will ultimately be replaced by a combination of the metaverse and chatbots.
Ok, the key selling point of this concept is is brings back some really cool UX concepts that we somehow lost when Usenet finally succumbed to porn and spam and porn spam. The cool thing about Usenet was you had a full page Posts that were robustly threaded in the context of Groups. What’s more, you had in-line editing.
Now, obviously, some of this sums up modern-day Reddit and that would be the thing most people would initially compare the service to because no one remembers Usenet except for weirdos like me. And, in real terms Reddit is the closest approximation to Usenet that exists.
But the implementation is really ham-handed, at least in my view.
Imagine if everyone when they went through on-boarding was forced to created both public and private groups devoted to not just grouping their friends, but also creating the equivalent of really robust Facebook Groups combined with Twitter Lists.
And there would be a lot of innate redundancy in the system, to the point that Groups would be seen as disposable. This would, in turn, reduce the likelihood of not only a Group growing too large, but also the sort of in-ward looking thinking that alienates people who just want to discuss a topic without having to lurk for weeks while they read the Group’s FAQ.
That’s a key element of Twitter — there is almost no learning curve. One can just jump in and start tweeting. The downside to this is, of course, this makes it far easier for trolls and bots to flood the service.
Anyway, if you establish a service where you have a full page Post with in-line editing and robust threading, I think it would be instantly popular. After, of course, people stopped trying to figure out why you had just re-created Reddit (which you hadn’t.)
There are so many cool things you could do with the UX of this service. You could push entire pre-formated Webpages into the service that Users could pick apart via in-ling editing. You could have some sort of profit sharing agreement with content providers whereby they push into the service complete Webpages with their ads already in the pages.
Or something. Something like that.
The point is — none of this is going to happen. While there IS a very narrow window of opportunity because of the current Elon Musk-generated instability at Twitter…no one listens to me.
There are, at last count, now two viable Twitter clones vying for the attention the many people fed up with Elon Musk’s shenanigans. Both Post and Spoutable seem to believe that the path to success is to lean into being a “safe space” for center-Left people.
From what I can tell, however, both services are kind of missing the point. It seems what people want is not a “woke” version of Twitter, but Twitter without Elon Musk. They have certain end-user experience expectations and if they don’t get that, they complain — even if they’re center-Left.
For instance, Spoutable, which is, in my opinion, the Twitter clone that clones Twitter the best, is apparently having a big problem with well-meaning people wanting to post things the service considers “porn.” So, you the squeaky wheels of sex workers and erotica writers screaming at the top of their lungs about how much Spoutable sucks….just as Spoutable is trying to pounce on fleeing Twitter users.
The solution is to give people what they want when it comes to Twitter — an almost no holds barred freeforall where you just come to expect that you’re going to have to block half a dozen people before dawn for being totally, completely insane and malicious.
So, I’m really enjoying Spoutable, but I’m a bit concerned that it will ultimately be just another social media flash in the pan.
There is some chatter about some former Twitter employees working on their own Twitter clone that I have a lot of hope for. If anyone can get a Twitter clone right, it should be them.
I will note in passing, of course, that I still think one could cherry pick the UX principles of the old Usenet News to create a service that would be a lot better than Twitter and would, in fact, explode with popularity if you just were able to implement it.
But I fear that particular delusional daydream of mine is just not going to happen.
So, let’s go through how an advertiser might use this Twitter killer that I’ve come up with. To me, the main appeal of this hypothetical service is you have a lot more freedom in what type of ads you push into the platform because they can pretty much be the same size as a Webpage. AND you have the option of using traditional banner ad sizes within Posts in the system as well.
Groups Anyone would be able to create a Group about anything you liked. It would be attached to your account ID, which would allow for redundancy, which would allow for scalability. This is a very flexible nature of the service — at least in this specific aspect. You would have to have a robust discovery feature for that to work, of course. Threads These would be presented much like a traditional blog inside of a Group. This would allow for huge page-sized advertisement. There would also be a subthread feature which would be pretty cool. Posts What would be interesting about this would be you would have inline, collaborative editing like you might find with a Google Doc. You would have, say, six people able to inline edit a Post before a new Post in the Thread is spawned because you would run out of colors.
So, here’s how an advertiser might use my Twitter Killer.
Remember, using their account, they can create as many different Groups as they like about whatever aspect of the service or widget that they’re selling. AND, what’s more, they can control who can Post into the Groups they’ve created.
So, if you were a major advertiser, you could have a variety of Groups devoted to discussion about any number of not just a widget, but an element of a widget that you felt people might really want to talk about. And also remember there would be an Excerpt feature that would work with a Feed feature like you might see with Facebook or Twitter, which would cut through the service to allow people to know when a new Thread or Post was created in Groups they might be monitoring that were run by people they might be monitoring.
This is a far more powerful brand tool than either Reddit or Usenet — or even Facebook, for that matter.
With the crazy, fucked up things going on with Twitter at the moment, I find myself still daydreaming about my startup idea that cherrypicks some of the UX elements of the long-dead Usenet.
The key issue is, of course, the idea of Groups. I am well aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both Google+ and Reddit. But I have really thought through how to use this service. Here’s the basic elements of the service as I imagine it
Groups Anyone would be able to create a Group about anything you liked. It would be attached to your account ID, which would allow for redundancy, which would allow for scalability. This is a very flexible nature of the service — at least in this specific aspect. You would have to have a robust discovery feature for that to work, of course. Threads These would be presented much like a traditional blog inside of a Group. This would allow for huge page-sized advertisement. There would also be a subthread feature which would be pretty cool. Posts What would be interesting about this would be you would have inline, collaborative editing like you might find with a Google Doc. You would have, say, six people able to inline edit a Post before a new Post in the Thread is spawned because you would run out of colors.
Of course, there is the problem — but very necessary — issue of controlling who can Post. Having a lot of the service Read Only for most people is the only way that any sort of service based on Groups can scale and be successful.
The fact that absolutely no one cares about this very well thought out concept despite the chaos surrounding Twitter at the moment is enough for me to realize that maybe….it’s time for me to give up and put all my attention on the six novel project that I’m working on.
And, yet, occasionally I get drunk and need to vent about something OTHER than all these novels I’m working on. All this talk about Twitter ending once and for all makes me think — then what? And if Elon Musk pulled the plug on Twitter, which I don’t think he will, then there’s a greater-than-zero sum chance that someone might take me up on all my rantings about a startup based on Usenet’s best bits.
An interesting element of the UX of this proposed Twitter killer is it would, like Facebook or Twitter, have a “Feed” feature that would cut through all the Groups and Threads. But how to do it? How to convey to the reader that if they click on something they can go straight to a new Post in a Thread they might be interested in?
I think the way to do it is something like this: Whenever you finish a Post, you would be prompted to drag down a highlighting feature that you could use to create an Excerpt. That Excerpt, would, in turn, be featured in the Feed under the subject of the Thread.
It’s the best of both worlds.
I suppose you might say it’s a tick bit more complicated that the average Twitter or Facebook user might be used to, but I think it’s intuitive enough that they would begin to use it without even thinking about it. Or, at least most users would.
The beauty of this feature is “flattens” the service down to something much like Twitter. Groups and Threads would still exist, of course, but they would be far more manageable than they ever were with the old Usenet 25 odd years ago. Too bad no one listens to me, huh.
Here is how I imagine brands might use my “Twitter Killer” on a practical basis. The key issue to remember is Brands, like everyone else, would have a far more feature rich experience to use than they would on Twitter.
Instead of just a 280 character tweet, they would have an entire webpage to work with — that would be threaded! So, say you were a Widget Company and you were releasing a new Widget. You could create new Groups devoted to different elements of this Widget.
And because you would have control over who could Post to each of these groups — they would, essentially be read-only to most people — you could all but eliminate trolls and other people who might attack your brand just because they could. They could still attack your Brand elsewhere, of course. Just not in your Groups.
What’s more, people could buy your Widget straight from a Post — with our Twitter Killer getting a cut, of course.
If you were a content provider, meanwhile, you could push content from your own site –original formatting included — into the Twitter Killer itself. Then authorized users could inline edit your content inside a Group that was threaded.
All that sounds pretty cool to me, at least. Too bad this is all just the ranting of a broke writer who should be working on one of six novels he wants to write before he crokes.
We’re fast approaching the theoretical terminal velocity tipping point in the demise of Twitter — maybe? It’s one of those, I’ll know it when I see it types of things. But the key thing to focus on is there remains a narrow window of opportunity for someone to swoop in an eat Twitter’s lunch once and for all.
But whomever did it would have to be quick about it — you probably have months, not years, to get whatever it is you want to found out the door and in the virtual hands of the currently Twitter-using public.
At the moment, it’s possible that this window of opportunity will come and go, giving Elon Musk enough time to finally get his sea legs and come roaring back. He didn’t become the wealthiest man in the world by being totally incompetent. It’s just were in a chaotic moment between him buying Twitter and him turning things around for good.
Anyway. I still wish someone would do something with MY Twitter Killer idea.
But here, again, is a basic feature set of my daydream.
Groups Everyone would have to create Groups, both Public and Private just to use the service. Everything would be found in Groups that individual users would create in an ad hoc manner for whatever they wanted to talk about. Groups would be attached to an individual User’s ID, so you could have multiple, redundant Groups about the same subject. This aids in scalability. Managed Participation One key element of a Group would be not everyone could contribute. Whenever you created a Group, you would be prompted to set participating requirements, like, say “Only Verified Users” or whatever. This also helps with scalability because even most popular Group, the ones viewed by potentially millions of people, would not become unmanageable
Threads Inside of each Group, there would be Threads. These would be laid out like a blog. Subthreads would be a clickaway and set up in a similar fashion. This does away with the clunky threading of Usenet, which just isn’t practical anymore.
Posts The Post would be the central component of the service. You would have a whole Webpage to work with. You could throw in anything you might otherwise put in a Webpage using a WYSIWYG editor. Inline, Collaborative Editing What’s interesting is, once a Post was published, there would be collaborative inline editing of that post by other Users — until, of course, you ran out of colors and a new Post was spawned in the Thread.
Absolutely no one cares or is listening to me. So, unless I win the PowerBall, all of this is a huge waste of time. But, as I keep saying, it is relaxing to keep solving different problems in this hypothetical service, even if it will never come into being.
Ok, suppose we’ve designed a new Twitter-like service inspired by Usenet UX — then what? Well, the first thing I would do is have an invite-only program designed to seed the service with content providers — especially the type that Elon Musk is doing everything in his power to alienate at the moment.
This artificial scarcity would not only allow the service to gradually boostrap itself up, it would also generate a lot of buzz that would make people want to join as soon as possible. This worked really well with the original launch of Gmail.
Anyway, what would be the reaction of your typical Twitter user once the there was a mass migration to this new, hypothetical service?
I think the first thing that Twitter users would note is how there was a lot of control over who could actually Post to the service. This would probably the the thing that was the most controversial. Right wing nutjobs would blast the service as too restrictive and “censoring” them from be racist, misogynistic and generally caustic and abusive.
But once people got used to that element of the service, the next thing that Twitter users would find weird is how much space they had when they did Post. Instead of just 280 characters, they could really get into whatever subject they wanted to talk about. They could throw in video, pictures and, hell, a podcast that they recorded, as well.
Now, obviously, there is a problem with this — sometimes, people just want to write less than 280 characters. There are two ways to look at this. One is the “medium is the message” and as such, by definition, people will write a lot more simply because they can or feel obliged to.
The other idea is that you would have to manage shorter Posts in some way. I think one way to do this is you would have some sort of Executive Summary feature where you could write essentially a tweet. Remember, this service would have a Feed like Twitter and Facebook and, as such, would already excerpt a portion of the longer Post found in a Group. You could lean into that use that excerpt need as the place to feature shorter Posts.
Or something.
I guess the point is — while the transition from Twitter to my hypothetical service would be a bit bumpy, it wouldn’t be impossible. People would eventually get used to the idea and, if you played your cards right, Twitter would become just another forgotten social media service like Friendster and MySpace.
I only keep writing about my proposed “Twitter Killer” because it seems like every day on Twitter now, its new owner Elon Musk flings off yet more chaos. As such, I find myself thinking — what are we going to do if Twitter implodes? What then?
Then I remember the Twitter Killer idea that I’ve been noodling on for years now and think up yet another angle I might write about. But I am well aware that all of this is pointless in the end. It’s not like anyone is going to take me up on this idea — I would have to fund and build it myself it was ever to become a reality.
As it is, I’m just a broke ass writer in the middle of nowhere, struggling to finish my first novel. So, lulz.
But here, again, is a basic feature set of my daydream.
Groups Everyone would have to create Groups, both Public and Private just to use the service. Everything would be found in Groups that individual users would create in an ad hoc manner for whatever they wanted to talk about. Groups would be attached to an individual User’s ID, so you could have multiple, redundant Groups about the same subject. This aids in scalability. Managed Participation One key element of a Group would be not everyone could contribute. Whenever you created a Group, you would be prompted to set participating requirements, like, say “Only Verified Users” or whatever. This also helps with scalability because even most popular Group, the ones viewed by potentially millions of people, would not become unmanageable
Threads Inside of each Group, there would be Threads. These would be laid out like a blog. Subthreads would be a clickaway and set up in a similar fashion. This does away with the clunky threading of Usenet, which just isn’t practical anymore.
Posts The Post would be the central component of the service. You would have a whole Webpage to work with. You could throw in anything you might otherwise put in a Webpage using a WYSIWYG editor. Inline, Collaborative Editing What’s interesting is, once a Post was published, there would be collaborative inline editing of that post by other Users — until, of course, you ran out of colors and a new Post was spawned in the Thread.
Absolutely no one cares or is listening to me. So, unless I win the PowerBall, all of this is a huge waste of time. But, as I keep saying, it is relaxing to keep solving different problems in this hypothetical service, even if it will never come into being.
You must be logged in to post a comment.