Elon is tossing a bunch of stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks. I wouldn't be surprised if we land in a place where clicking a link to another social media bills the poster.

Premium said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

Elon is also forgetting what makes Twitter good. He's too focused on the free speech side hes forgetting what actually drives traffic. It's real time updates on an event and a pseudo celebrity posting. People don't really care about what Clark down street has to say about the game but would like to see Jerry Jones or anybody random celebrity tweet about it and tweet back. He should make that side of it better.

Really Elon show call Texags and talk to Brandon. It's a nice setup here. You got tiered pricing for extra features and Texags promotes Aggie celebrities. They drive traffic which drives advertising dollars.

---

If someone non stop promoted another brand that person would be banned on TexAgs

---

Not if it was a Aggie celebrity. If JFF actively posted here and on his signature was his uncles clothing store in Tyler. I doubt Brandon would tell him to cut it out. Maybe I'm wrong…Brandon want to chime in?

Dan Scott said:

---

Premium said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

Elon is also forgetting what makes Twitter good. He's too focused on the free speech side hes forgetting what actually drives traffic. It's real time updates on an event and a pseudo celebrity posting. People don't really care about what Clark down street has to say about the game but would like to see Jerry Jones or anybody random celebrity tweet about it and tweet back. He should make that side of it better.

Really Elon show call Texags and talk to Brandon. It's a nice setup here. You got tiered pricing for extra features and Texags promotes Aggie celebrities. They drive traffic which drives advertising dollars.

---

If someone non stop promoted another brand that person would be banned on TexAgs

---

Not if it was a Aggie celebrity. If JFF actively posted here and on his signature was his uncles clothing store in Tyler. I doubt Brandon would tell him to cut it out. Maybe I'm wrong…Brandon want to chime in?

---

I would be interested in seeing the reply, my guess is they wouldn't allow it. And even if they did, bad comparison. The new rules are for all Twitter posters. You'd have to ask TexAgs if they would allow all external URLs to be promoted, from all posters.

Further, as for following rules. Even Elon pays the $8 for his own site. I doubt Brandon pays.

I think what's interesting is determining the starting point of promotion and who gets paid. YouTube making money off content creators that post links on Twitter for free. If Twitter argues Twitter is driving traffic to YouTube so Twitter should get paid as well, could ESPN or WWE who promote Twitter when they say some event is trending worldwide or share Twitter handles, ask Twitter for a share of ad dollars they drive to Twitter?

They are all using each other to promote each other. I think it gets messy if that's the position. The last thing Twitter wants to be is Truth Social.

One of if not the biggest issue with Twitter was how to monetize. Most other platform use ad revenue and pay for clicks, etc (I don't follow the mechanics closely).

If Elon is seeing someone with a lot of followers / reach linking to as site where they then monetize, and he is not getting a cut of that, well that dog don't hunt no more.

Imagine he is just working out the details to cut himself in on the revenue stream. Twitter users will throw a fit to be able to link, other sites will see a drop in the traffic being referred, and Musk sits down and they work it out.

Its obvious not many around here are entrepreneurs and understand how commerce and capitalism work. Elon, from where I sit, seems to be a wizard genius at making money. Good for him.

Premium said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

Premium said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

Elon is also forgetting what makes Twitter good. He's too focused on the free speech side hes forgetting what actually drives traffic. It's real time updates on an event and a pseudo celebrity posting. People don't really care about what Clark down street has to say about the game but would like to see Jerry Jones or anybody random celebrity tweet about it and tweet back. He should make that side of it better.

Really Elon show call Texags and talk to Brandon. It's a nice setup here. You got tiered pricing for extra features and Texags promotes Aggie celebrities. They drive traffic which drives advertising dollars.

---

If someone non stop promoted another brand that person would be banned on TexAgs

---

Not if it was a Aggie celebrity. If JFF actively posted here and on his signature was his uncles clothing store in Tyler. I doubt Brandon would tell him to cut it out. Maybe I'm wrong…Brandon want to chime in?

---

I would be interested in seeing the reply, my guess is they wouldn't allow it. And even if they did, bad comparison. The new rules are for all Twitter posters. You'd have to ask TexAgs if they would allow all external URLs to be promoted, from all posters.

Further, as for following rules. Even Elon pays the $8 for his own site. I doubt Brandon pays.

---

But reality is we're not all equal. If stopped posting, Brandon wouldn't care. If the Aggie celebrity who was active on the forum and drove traffic to the site stopped posting, Brandon would care more. I expect that person to get away with a rule I can't.

Dan Scott said:

---

I think what's interesting is determining the starting point of promotion and who gets paid. YouTube making money off content creators that post links on Twitter for free. If Twitter argues Twitter is driving traffic to YouTube so Twitter should get paid as well, could ESPN or WWE who promote Twitter when they say some event is trending worldwide or share Twitter handles, ask Twitter for a share of ad dollars they drive to Twitter?

They are all using each other to promote each other. I think it gets messy if that's the position. The last thing Twitter wants to be is Truth Social.

---

Don't think your setup works. Its EPNS twitter handle or Twitter hashtag that drives interest in the game. Ad companies pay ESPN for the exposure. In your example, its actually Twitter driving the exposure to the content on ESPN, not the other way around. ESPN or ad companies owe Twitter.

There are mechanisms for companies to be paid for product exposures across all sorts of media, including live news.

YouTube is already banning and "twittering" content. Why would he promote more of the same?

Dan Scott said:

---

I think what's interesting is determining the starting point of promotion and who gets paid. YouTube making money off content creators that post links on Twitter for free. If Twitter argues Twitter is driving traffic to YouTube so Twitter should get paid as well, could ESPN or WWE who promote Twitter when they say some event is trending worldwide or share Twitter handles, ask Twitter for a share of ad dollars they drive to Twitter?

They are all using each other to promote each other. I think it gets messy if that's the position. The last thing Twitter wants to be is Truth Social.

---

When Twitter is the news, the news can broadcast on their own or use Twitter. ESPN posting on Twitter is more valuable to ESPN right now than it is to Twitter. That should change. ESPN needs to pay to promote their brand.

Dan Scott said:

---

Premium said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

Premium said:

---

Dan Scott said:

---

Elon is also forgetting what makes Twitter good. He's too focused on the free speech side hes forgetting what actually drives traffic. It's real time updates on an event and a pseudo celebrity posting. People don't really care about what Clark down street has to say about the game but would like to see Jerry Jones or anybody random celebrity tweet about it and tweet back. He should make that side of it better.

Really Elon show call Texags and talk to Brandon. It's a nice setup here. You got tiered pricing for extra features and Texags promotes Aggie celebrities. They drive traffic which drives advertising dollars.

---

If someone non stop promoted another brand that person would be banned on TexAgs

---

Not if it was a Aggie celebrity. If JFF actively posted here and on his signature was his uncles clothing store in Tyler. I doubt Brandon would tell him to cut it out. Maybe I'm wrong…Brandon want to chime in?

---

I would be interested in seeing the reply, my guess is they wouldn't allow it. And even if they did, bad comparison. The new rules are for all Twitter posters. You'd have to ask TexAgs if they would allow all external URLs to be promoted, from all posters.

Further, as for following rules. Even Elon pays the $8 for his own site. I doubt Brandon pays.

---

But reality is we're not all equal. If stopped posting, Brandon wouldn't care. If the Aggie celebrity who was active on the forum and drove traffic to the site stopped posting, Brandon would care more. I expect that person to get away with a rule I can't.

---

JFF drives no business to the site. Bad example. At least use a regular contributor like McGee

Dan Scott said:

---

I think what's interesting is determining the starting point of promotion and who gets paid. YouTube making money off content creators that post links on Twitter for free. If Twitter argues Twitter is driving traffic to YouTube so Twitter should get paid as well, could ESPN or WWE who promote Twitter when they say some event is trending worldwide or share Twitter handles, ask Twitter for a share of ad dollars they drive to Twitter?

They are all using each other to promote each other. I think it gets messy if that's the position. The last thing Twitter wants to be is Truth Social.

---

I'm not on twitter nor FB or any other social media other than here. And I never understood how everything is cross linked and one platform leads to another. Building "audiences" on one platform to transition to another.

When Rekieta was banned on both Youtube and Twitter a few months back, talk about the SHTF moment. His fellow lawtubers and followers went beserk and he was reinstated. But the appeals were across all platforms. And he is upfront about using his Youtube channel that he has been building for five years to drive people to his twitch, rumble, locals channel. He is what we used to call a triple dipper. He gets money from every platform, except twitter.

C@LAg said:

---

this is dumb. Worst $45BB spent ever, outside of govt waste.

---

Have you sold your Tesla yet?

If you advertise on Twitter, you have to pay for it.

Pretty sure TexAgs works this way as well.

If you self promote on this site to drive financial gain for yourself, Brandon and friends will remove your posts, tell you to knock it off, then introduce you to becoming an official TexAgs sponsor.

Elon is doing the same.

Policy will be adjusted to suspending accounts only when that account’s *primary* purpose is promotion of competitors, which essentially falls under the no spam rule

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 18, 2022

C@LAg said:

---

"it is a private platform. it can do whatever it wants.

You want links, build your own platform."

- libs

---

This is the conservative position. Was before Musk bought twitter, remains so.

I shared a Twitter spaces on fb today. That's the only value Twitter has now.

Wonder if fb will return the favor

. . . said:

---

Policy will be adjusted to suspending accounts only when that account’s *primary* purpose is promotion of competitors, which essentially falls under the no spam rule

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 18, 2022

---

I love that Elon pays that much attention and respect to Jeremy at The Quartering. Jeremy is a good guy and he sells coffee and teas.

It was Jeremy that got Musk to reinstate Rekieta on twitter.

C@LAg said:

---

this is dumb.

if other sites retaliate, Twitter is dead in the water. For good.

Worst $45BB spent ever, outside of govt waste.

---

I think it's funny they're doing this and will have to monitor whether links are to personal pages or just references like are posted here. No links to Truth Social pages either. If no one else does that, I wonder if it will hurt Twitter

As a company from eastern Germany, we know that building a wall to try and keep people from leaving isn't a good idea. https://t.co/jxlbO9s0Pk

— Mastodon (@Mastodon@mastodon.social) (@joinmastodon) December 18, 2022

aggiehawg said:

---

So when a lawtuber tweets out his/her live stream of a trial on Youtube or rumble, is that a violation?

---

Hawg, I think twitter will be rolling out their own long form and live video hosting and Donny want to be used to drive traffic to other sites.

And they may not want the butt-hurt to take their followers with them. This is probably a secondary interest but will get the most discussion.

I will say this is all fascinating to watch from the sidelines and not caring what really happens. If social media collapses and disappears, awesome.

If Elon cleans up Twitter and makes it the free speech monetized platform he's talked about, great.

Don't care either way.

YouBet said:

---

I will say this is all fascinating to watch from the sidelines and not caring what really happens. If social media collapses and disappears, awesome.

If Elon cleans up Twitter and makes it the free speech monetized platform he's talked about, great.

Don't care either way.

---

It's amazing to me how many people apparently have their whole lives wrapped up in Twitter.

Gonna reverse it based on the poll?

Should we have a policy preventing the creation of or use of existing accounts for the main purpose of advertising other social media platforms?
Yes 21.4%
No 78.6%

Should we have a policy preventing the creation of or use of existing accounts for the main purpose of advertising other social media platforms?

— Twitter Safety (@TwitterSafety) December 19, 2022

I've been continuing to direct my many, many Twitter followers to visit me on my InstaFapChat account and as of yet no punitive action has been taken. It seems the storm has passed.