The beauty of Twitter is its brevity. It forces people to cut out the flab and be concise. This in turn makes the entire steam easily glanceable. Huge walls of text will take away much of what makes Twitter special.
That way users can be a bit more expressive without the word-barf walls of text which make Facebook, Tumblr, and other social platforms a nightmare to read through.
Right now, there's a real benefit to having short Twitter handles, because they count less against the limit (longer ones really add up in Twitter conversations that involve multiple people).
I understand why usernames count towards the limit, but I wish they didn't.
While you are at it, urls cost you 5. Images cost you 10.
Removes the benefit of shorter twitter handles, longer twitter handles doesn't fuck up what you are trying to say and, you can talk to multiple people in the same tweet.
However, I feel like it would be weird for people to adopt, and probably put people off of Twitter, since paying attention to a 1-1 limit is annoying enough.
@Yes, @something @like @that @might @prove @quite @funny.
The essence of Twitter, Instagram, etc. is the social network. The format of the content is fungible.
Further, short tweets can coexist with text-walls just as pics and videos coexist with 140 character tweets.
Still, I don't quite know if I like that idea. I guess we'll see.
For reference, here's what 10,000 characters looks like:
In figuring itself out now, Twitter's real problem that its existing users haven't had to experience any real degree of change for a long time. Facebook was kind of smart to "move fast and break things" and ignore the complaints from people who don't want to have to learn new ways of doing things :P