ICYMI Twitter is on fire. I'm not quite as fatalistic or prophetic as many others, but it's hard to deny that the current steps of evolution on the platform has been alarming. However, you can go and read hundreds, if not thousands, of articles on this drama. The more important question to ask, it seems, is: should we care?
When it comes to the vast expanse that is the Internet, the best model (in my experience) for sorting through all of the mess is to address the 'why' behind every tool that you choose to utilize. When Checkpoint first started, I attempted to do, well, all of it. And I burnt out on that much stuff. One can't build community on every single social platform. At least, not alone. Given that, Checkpoint took steps at the very beginning of our life cycle to ask the question: why are we on [social platform]? We took our answers and formulated two major piles that our platforms fall into: billboards and bases.
Most social platforms are billboards for us. A billboard is a tremendous sign that one passes by on the highway in real life. Online, a billboard serves the same purpose. Where do we want people to see us as they scroll down the social feed? We don't focus on community building, interaction is very minimal. It's not entirely announcements, per se, but it is unapologetically purely in existence to be seen, consumed, and scrolled past. The intention of the space fosters attention, not relationship.
We only have three social platforms that serve as bases. Twitch, Discord, and YouTube. A base is a space where we allow community to build. We hold some form of expectation (both for ourselves and those that consume) to engage in the content being shared and created there. The intention of the space fosters relationship, not attention.
When it comes to Twitter, you will notice is not one of our three bases. When pressed with the consideration of if we will remain on the platform or not, the question has little to do with drama and more to do with the purpose it serves.