That's a relevant question :-)

Options are endless, but I like this incremental improvement. It hints towards the next incremental improvements (ex. you can nest there few popular algo choices); next time figure our interface for helping to create 'custom' ones; and so on.

I strongly believe that abdicating on the need of using some relevance algos is an immature MVP, and that it suppresses good conversations.  

 The never-ending academic discussion about "But how do you define relevance?" does not matter.

Any simple definition moves you closer to a better one. 

 Agreed. My point is that the current version of relevance is chosen by Elon for all of us. We should choose our own 

 You are right, it's just incremental step; might as well lead to more sensationalism incentives and chasing to be the first to 'break" in with their take.

Yet, it hints a path; and idea that can be iterated on further. Maybe not by Elon, but that's besides the point. 

 I might not have as much faith in people as you. I don’t think most people will care about choosing their own algorithms even though it’s what they should do 

 I agree. Open source algorithms that we can choose would be ideal. I just don’t want this half assed measure to placate everyone in the fight for open source algos