People always do this. No you don't want to, don't try and be a User-Hero. And if for some insane reason you do want to, implementing and supporting it would cost more than they would ever take in revenue because no one else wants to pay apart from companies who then get preferential treatment.
if anyone wants to do this right now, just create a promoted account ad campaign and promote your own twitter account.<p>Now you get the privilege of paying for twitter and perhaps more followers too.
I'm surprised that Twitter hasn't added a cost for verification, considering these accounts have functionality that many of us don't have (i.e. ability to filter interactions, etc). Sure, people can opt to not pay for verification, but considering the value that top end users get from a presence on Twitter, it almost seems to be a no-brainer to add a verification charge.<p>My only worry for going ad-free for a fee is that it provides an argument for adverts to become even more of an inconvenience. If I could pay $5 a month to skip adverts, then what is to stop Twitter from throwing a ton of ads on their platform and then saying "if you don't like it, pay us".
I would absolutely pay for a twitter account. to remove ads but also support a viable path to stay independent and functional. Twitter does a huge amount of good in the world, and are important for freedom of ideas in many countries
Just to add to the brainstorm: they could charge users who have over, say, 5k followers a monthly fee to reach 100% of the audience instead of some arbitrary mix of them. The fee would increase with the # of followers.<p>It's in the spirit of, but not exactly like, Facebook charging businesses to reach more of their followers by "boosting" posts.<p>It would align the fees with the users who value most directly from using the service as a mass media broadcast device -- a lot of whom are businesses or quasi-businesses. They could waive fees for governments, educational institutions, non-profits, whatever.
Ask App Dot Net how that turned out. (Although there are definitely network effects in play here that Twitter would have the advantage of.)<p>I want to pay $3/month for twitter, but I don't think they'll ever add it.
Other than having public direct contact with individuals and brands I never saw the point of twitter. I thought I was in the minority a couple of years ago when Twitter was growing exponentially. Now I see it's the other way around.<p>I'm not surprised their ad revenue has been falling about 80% in the last 2 years. There's little communication in 140 characters and the chaotic stream of tweets is unattractive to most users.<p>Maybe Twitter could be more vaulable if owned by Google or Facebook, and integrated in the services of those giants.
I'm amazed by the amount of abuse that's prevalent on Twitter. This is based on observation of replies to tweets by certain individuals. Abusive comments being retweeted and fav'd is such a commonplace. It's hard to imagine how can one continue using the platform.<p>It's apparent that there are huge number of accounts that are created in order to promote individuals, governments, products, ...<p>Twitter seems to be only interested in user base growth (which would directly affect its valuation).
There was App.net once ... Where you have to actually pay to use it [1] and it was ad-free twitter clone. It failed.<p>1 : <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App.net" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/App.net</a>
You need to take into account that twitter is losing users and not precisely due to the recent changes. They need to change and get new features to gain popularity, wether you like it or not. That's my view, maybe I'm wrong.