Since it's sometimes considered nice to explain a downvote, I wanted to mention I downvoted you for spending time telling us how qualified you were instead of just restating your question in a simpler way.
I don't know why your other post was downvoted, but probably because people think it's not an interesting question, could be determined by actually going to Google yourself and doing your own homework/search and most people don't feel like patents, if they exist, are the problem with twitter's dominance.
Actually -- by saying "very qualified remarks" forkandwait was not talking about his/her education. S/He was instead referring to the fact that by calling the problem of getting market share "(VERY non-trivial)" in the OP - they were well aware of the issue and asking a simple question about twitter's patent protection (or lack thereof).
Well, you don't seem to understand what "qualified" means in the context written -- when I said that my response was qualified it meant that I put caveats around it ("I qualified my response"). Sorry if I was unclear.
I don't know why your other post was downvoted, but probably because people think it's not an interesting question, could be determined by actually going to Google yourself and doing your own homework/search and most people don't feel like patents, if they exist, are the problem with twitter's dominance.