Twitter replies: putting a limit on your conversation

Twitter is rolling out new settings that will allow all users to control who can reply to Tweets. It’s a feature they tested earlier in the year, but now we’ll all be able to start limiting who replies to our content. So, what does this actually mean? We see two options:

1: Meaningful conversations 

By using Twitter’s new settings, users will be able to choose out of three options when posting a Tweet:

  1. Allow anyone to reply (default)
  2. Limit replies to people you follow
  3. Restrict replies to users you specifically mention

If 2 and 3 are selected, users will still be able to like or retweet the Tweet, the reply button will simply be greyed out.

One outcome will be cleaner feeds. This will be particularly useful for hosting panels or interviews – Twitter is already working on a way to invite people into conversations. Where before, users that are either interested in the content or simply would like to voice their own opinion, negative or positive, would flood these feeds and interviews in panel would be almost impossible save for an open Q&A. Now, the organiser will be able to directly choose who can reply or engage with the Tweet, all while everyone on Twitter can still see Tweets and react to them. Users can even start their own conversations via retweets without disrupting the original chain.

2: Fractured viewpoints?

One of the main draws of Twitter is open discussion, loosely organised via hashtags and by the people you follow. There is a concern that limiting who can comment on your posts can hinder the discourse happening on Twitter.

Yet, Twitter sees this almost as a way of further organising different viewpoints. During testing, they saw users branch off from limited discussions and start their own, highlighting their differing perspectives. It will be interesting to see whether Twitter will eventually implement features that better highlight these branching paths and make them easier to follow, as at the moment users will have to search by who retweeted the content, which can be painful.

The important thing is that user feedback has been a feeling of increased safety. Spamming and trolling is a large part of the internet, where anonymity is king. Many people have been at the receiving end of unjust personal attacks and have deleted their accounts. Limiting who can reply to Tweets can give people the confidence needed to say things they might otherwise feel unsafe putting out there, or to stay on the platform discussing ideas with their followers. This will of course have negative effects as well, but between simply deleting your entire Twitter account or staying on the platform, this option seems to be a healthier middle ground.

Latest Posts

Yep – it’s a 101 for finding out if your B2B social campaigns and content are delivering. Think you know it all? Think again. The sands of marketing are shifting…again. Aligning metrics and business objectives. Most B2B marketers can tell you the engagement rate. And they certainly know the level…
Read More
Meta has started rolling ads into Threads timelines globally from late January 2026. That’s the moment Threads stops being a side app and becomes a paid, recommendation-led public square. Threads has passed 400 million monthly active users, and Meta has put daily actives at around 150 million. The strategic implication for B2C and B2B is the same; distribution gets easier to buy, credibility gets harder to earn. Threads rewards coherence in public conversation, how you answer, how you sound, how specific you are. Treat it as a trust surface, because that’s where decisions get shaped now.
Read More
Feeds are getting tired of “perfect”. A lot of the most interesting work going into 2026 is reacting against hyper-digital polish with visuals that feel more handled: scanned textures, mismatched elements, collecting layouts, and deliberate “imperfections” that make the human hand visible again. That matters for social, because audiences clock…
Read More