Certain elements of the way twitter worked encouraged this fighting particularly effectively. Quote tweeting (especially for tweets out of context) was often used for purpose of inviting widespread harassment of someone whose opinion someone and and their followers did not agree with. This was especially true of internal organizational spats; the success of those posts depended on how may impulsive, emotional reactions one could draw from the right framing of the quoted tweet.

We like to rail against social capital or think that we are immune to that feeling of being popular (or agreed with) and thus having even a scintilla of power can have on us. The truth is we live in a time where very few of us have any power whatsoever (as individuals) to begin with, and because of this, those feelings of affirmation and righteousness are extremely alluring, even though in the grand scheme of things they're pretty much an illusion.

Twitter exploited the emotions of power and popularity felt by isolated individuals, and, as a website cleverly designed to give us a quick endorphin rush for every ❤️, they were very successful at it. However, this highly encouraged if not outright gameified isolation and empowerment of the individual is antithetical to real leftist organizing and frames all conflicts (within and outside of organizations) as conflicts between individuals, cleverly obscuring and derailing the collective struggle.

even when multiple people shared the same side of a political disagreement, these conflicts were framed as being between "right" and "wrong" individuals, & thus became highly personal. If 2 people disagreed on prison abolition vs reform, that disagreement was not hashed out in a legitimate, good faith way; often someone on one side qt'd someone on the other out of context, saying something like they "love cops" and inviting their followers to issue a targeted, personal attack on the qt'd person