It's difficult to navigate forward or backward in a thread, specially when there are a lot of tweets, as every few tweets it has to load more. Plus, every tweet can have its own replies, so it's hard to read comments or reactions.
The only thing I find useful in threads is that, since every sentence is a separate tweet, it's easy to share a particular point in a conversation by sharing the URL for that particular tweet.
#2 is that your followers are much more likely to read a thread, since a thread of length N will appear in your timeline at least N times. I often scroll through my feed and see a (28/30) marker, view the thread and read the rest of it. (Yes, 30 whole tweets!) If you tweeted out a link to an article you wrote 30 times, nobody would follow you. Some people will tweet twice for people in other timezones, but that's all you can get away with for out-of-band links.
#3 is that a thread often evolves out of discussion that's already on Twitter, and must participate where that discussion is happening at the time. Reacting to fast-paced news is a key one. Take this example: Josh Chafetz (the constitutional law professor, not the Congressman) watches Twitter respond to the Arpaio pardoning, and tweets a thread on why people are hot-taking it wrong[^1]. The next day, he turns it into an op-ed[^2]. But what good is an op-ed about rushed hot-takes a day late?
Edit: I wouldn't be surprised if Twitter made thread counters a first-class feature. People use the platform how they want, and it will stretch to do what is needed.
#2 and #3, fair enough, though both of them sound like anti-features (spam, and fast soundbites over longer explanations) to me.
As the maker, I'm definitely biased and the Twitter UI isn't perfect, but I believe it's a step in the right direction.
The audience. You want people to read your stuff, put it where the eyeballs are. And while threads do have a bit of friction to them, it's quite a lot less friction than opening J. Random Link, especially on mobile.
Twitter helps me as a writer to communicate more concisely. The same goes for Twitter threads.
Also, as others have mentioned you post where your audience is if your goal is for others to read it.
Twitter threads are objectively terrible - they are hard to post, hard to read and hard to share; not because of some technical limitation, but because the people who built the tool designed it to resist being used in that way.
As long as there's a million places you can post text that's over 140 characters and then link to it from Twitter, this will remain a bad idea - because it's a misuse of a tool that makes it harder to use for both the creator and the consumer, while ignoring that there are trivial ways to avoid the problem entirely.
Some Twitter post occasional tweetstorms. This tool makes it easier to do that. Is it possible you're over-thinking it?
That happens when the 3rd tweet is a reply to the 1st and 4th a reply to the 2nd which breaks the whole thread
It’s built with Preact on top of Firebase. It’s free and open-sourced: https://github.com/kossnocorp/chirrapp. Check it out!
Maybe Twitter isn't the right tool for this then?
(I understand some apps make this easier than others, mine appears to be in the harder category)
Didn't get any upvotes so shut down the site. Made the same functionality available as a Chrome extension as well.
The source code : https://github.com/singhshashi/tweetsmart
Built it as I was learning React.
Often, a tweet storm pulls me in, but twitter's functionality is always a bit wonky.
1. Post something approximating a complete thought on Mastodon.
2. Screengrab it.
3. Tweet this image, along with a link to it, and text like "Thread".
(Today I learnt that HN ignores emoji in your comments.)