This is a great post, expressing thoughts that have been brewing in my mind much better than I could. I couldn't agree more with the fundamental thesis that 280 characters cannot lead to meaningful discourse as your exposure to different communities grows. In their own words,

> To run a high-follower account on twitter is to be constantly exposed to entire communities whose members will treat you as an enemy to be defeated or a buffoon to be humiliated the minute they become aware of you.

To me, though, this post begs the question: if having a large number of followers is so toxic, why do it? This post clearly misses the tight-knit blog communities of yesterday, yet they still insist on maintaining a public, high-follower profile.

If you are writing something worth reading, and only (mostly) care to interact with people who also write things worth reading, it doesn't seem prudent to open yourself up to the Internet at large. Private profiles can't be retweeted, and you get to moderate your reader list. Obviously, you reach a smaller audience, but if you are interested in "open and honest exchanges," finding people that are "intellectually interested," and getting away from the "bare-knuckle brawl," then isn't that a far, far better way to reach that goal?

> Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.