For the same reason I still called Alphabet - Google, and Meta - Facebook. I refuse to let large corporations just try and shake off their shitty past with a name change.
Theirs actually made a bit more sense. They didn't try to actually get people to use the new name, because it was a business restructure, not a "brand" restructure.
For business management purposes, it didn't make sense for a search engine company to do things like "own a car company". So they split the business units up and made things a little more organized. They ran into some name issues because the most recognizable face of the company is so strongly associated with search, and they didn't want to mess with that, so they made a new name for the top.
Companies do stuff like that all the time, but it usually doesn't raise to public attention because it doesn't happen to major brands, or hit the top level of the business.
They still label all their stuff Google, and their stock ticker is still googl.
Unfortunately it still has a critical mass user base, like reddit, so still here to stay until Elon really fucks up again.
Like you can try to use Mastodon or Blue sky but all the accounts I've wanted to follow are just people posting a few times with zero interactions, and then going back to Twitter.
I'm just sick of every article in existence calling it "X formally known as Twitter" like what's the point, just either say X or say twitter it's filler bullshit to extend the article.
I see that as a kind of professional fu to Elon. As in "We know we need to call it X now, but since nobody actually does that, we'll also add the actual name".
"X" letter is pronounced as "shh" sound in China for example Liu Cixin, the Chinese author of Three Body Problem, his last name supposed to be spelled "Cishin". So there is precedent.
Why had to update all the share icons at work because of Muskrat. I argued for leaving them as the bird, but I was overridden. Nobody has fond feelings about the site anymore. Every time it is brought up everyone's reaction is "ugh, that site..."
The fifth option, allowed for only very small part of the population, should be "I'm Elon Musk and I call it twitter, and have to be constantly reminded to not do so by assistants, executives, shareholders, janitors, strangers."
I really don't have a passionate stance about it, I just know I called it Twitter for ages, X is shitty branding and isn't going to work, and I stopped using the platform well before Musk took over, so I'm not doing any sort of mental labor trying to make myself use the crap name he chose.
It's a dead website to me, and it's everyone else's problem that they trapped themselves on Twitter, having no career without it. I'm not doing a single thing on behalf of anybody who is still there, those are ghosts, let them howl in the attic, I don't work here.
It's not a human person. It's a website full of assholes. I would make an effort for a transitioning person, but not for Elon Musk and his ham-fisted stupidity, for the folly of some wealthy prick.
Shouldn't renaming a social media really be up to the users? Shouldn't twitter users vote on that?
We just conceded that social media are owned by some corporate entity but the only values is in the users themselves. They build it. They should "own" and control the social media democratically, it should be accountable to them. It seems much more obvious than with traditional media that these should be democratic institutions.
Elon Musk behaving so blatantly stupid is unusual but the problem is really much larger.
Users shouldn't have any say over how a social media company is run -- there would be utter chaos.
Take Twitter for example -- I would imagine there are 33% liberals, 33% conservatives, 5% neo-nazis, 5% neo-communists and 24% who don't give a crap about politics because they are bots from China.
(I am just using these figures for an example -- I have no idea about real figures).
So if you need a new name then there would be a huge fight to call it any number of things, none of which relate to a corporate brand.
And if you ask them about corporate policies? "Censorship"? "Should we allow free speech?" "Should we allow hate speech?" "What is hate speech?"
Can you imagine the chaos?
No. Social media should not be run by its users. It is just asking for it to implode within a day.
If you want to talk about respect, let's talk about Elon's disrespect to everyone who used Twitter or talks about it now. I noted elsewhere in the discussion that the convention for websites is "name" .com or .org
Google (.com)
Twitter (.com)
Wikipedia (.org)
etc.
Breaking that mold to be "edgy" doesn't make one clever, it just causes confusion and wastes people's time.
In this case, it's wasted a lot of time because of how high-profile it is.
Side note - I'm also in MN. WDYT about the lake in Minneapolis that they renamed a few years back? It seems like there might be some parallels, but I don't think it's a good example for a worldwide audience. I only bring it up because of your username.
To the first part of your reply. I understand that Elon changed the name of both the company and the website, with a redirect of the former website. Is that not the case?
I am surprised how much time I am spending on the twitter/X thing.
As for the lake, I didn't have an issue with it. The local community, that has naming rights, decided to change the name to better reflect their community and values. The new name is not mean or disrespectful. Maps will take a bit to update, but the lake name won't be the only thing to change.
If you respond, what do you think of the flag?
Edit: I tested and X.com redirects to Twitter.com. So that is stupid.
Ownership doesn't give you some moral right to rename something. Especially ownership of a public platform
It probably gives you the legal right... That's it.
Maybe it's disrespectful, but I'd strongly argue the opposite - it might be a husk of its former self, but Twitter is an impressive technical feat. They did a lot of good in pushing the limits of technology, and modern programmers stand on their shoulders.
A drunk man-child changed its name late one night, with no respect for what he's destroying or even the slightest consideration of how to actually do it
I've never liked Twitter itself, but I think the creators deserve respect for advancing computer science
Thank you for your perspective. I had not considered that some would think of Twitter as something special and valuable. While Twitter has created some neat ideas, I see them as the "also ran that win due to huge amounts of cash". No morals involved.
The community that grew around Twitter was special, but temporary. Just like to communities before and after it.