Hacker News Reader

You'd think so, but it's been clear for a while that Dorsey and the board have fundamentally different views of the world and how Twitter should interact with it. His input doesn't count.

Board members' opinions always count. However, individually, they may not be influential enough to change the direction of the company, which I think is what you are saying?

All inputs count, the board collectively does what the majority wants , same as any democracy.

I love the succinctness of this answer.

That's what I assumed. The only BoD whose operations I am intimately familiar with has a ...slightly smaller...market cap.

In that place, the BoD is basically networking central - people get put on the board if the company thinks their connections will help the company out. I suppose they also weigh in on important decisions, but bringing along their Rolodex seems like the reason they are there (and I was assuming that is not so important when you are a $40B+ globally known company)