> Can you stop with the 'just asking questions' routine?

This combative response caught me by surprise.

I have nominal awareness of what Nitter stood for in the past.

Asking people for money given the legal precariousness AND not having a more strategic business model seems sketchy to me. Even bordering on scam.

Hence my genuine curiosity about whether there's something more substantial in the works.

It seems like a reasonable question to ask and I'm surprised to see you, in particular, take this point of view.

I could argue that due to the New York Times being the "newspaper of record" they should post my manifesto because, after all, it's very important. The obvious objection to this is that the NYT is privately owned, and despite having made itself very important, I don't have the right to tell them what to do.

This is the obvious objection to "Twitter is important, we should get to tell it what to do" as well, and you're old enough to know that Twitter kneecapping third-party apps is not at all new to the Musk chapter of the company, either.

Is it different, though? If so, how? Granted the jibe about the UN was sarcastic, but it's the same question, and, you know it.