←back to thread

1061 points danso | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.244s | source
Show context
Animats ◴[] No.23347437[source]
Twitter policy:

"We start from a position of assuming that people do not intend to violate our Rules. Unless a violation is so egregious that we must immediately suspend an account, we first try to educate people about our Rules and give them a chance to correct their behavior. We show the violator the offending Tweet(s), explain which Rule was broken, and require them to remove the content before they can Tweet again. If someone repeatedly violates our Rules then our enforcement actions become stronger. This includes requiring violators to remove the Tweet(s) and taking additional actions like verifying account ownership and/or temporarily limiting their ability to Tweet for a set period of time. If someone continues to violate Rules beyond that point then their account may be permanently suspended."

Somewhere a counter was just incremented. It's going to be amusing if Twitter management simply lets the automated system do its thing. At some point, after warnings, the standard 48-hour suspension will trigger. Twitter management can simply simply say "it is our policy not to comment on enforcement actions".

They've suspended the accounts of prominent people many times before.[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions

replies(7): >>23350687 #>>23352351 #>>23353399 #>>23353556 #>>23354990 #>>23357399 #>>23369630 #
75dvtwin ◴[] No.23357399[source]
Useful to know that this specific selective application of editorial bias by Twitter, was after Trump's executive order [1] on preventing online censorship of free speech.

>"... Twitter now selectively decides to place a warning label on certain tweets in a manner that clearly reflects political bias. As has been reported, Twitter seems never to have placed such a label on another politician’s tweet. .."

When a car manufacture represents their 18-wheeler fleet as a 'passenger cars' -- we understand that this is a lie and demand corrective action.

When twitter manufactures opinions and hides them as 'public forum discourse' -- we are supposed to be ok with that?

I would be ok if their manufactured opinions are displayed to paid subscribers only, who want to care what Jack Dorsey thinks about President Trump, obamagate or Brexit.

[1] https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-or...

replies(1): >>23359880 #
tripzilch ◴[] No.23359880[source]
How is this "political bias"?

Is everything that disagrees with Trump now "political bias"?

I'm not even from the US and I know what "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" means and what outcome it envisions.

> When twitter manufactures opinions and hides them as 'public forum discourse' -- we are supposed to be ok with that?

What are these opinions? Can you speak them out loud? Which opinions are being hidden? Can you write down the message of these opinions in plain words?

Could you write down these opinions as if they were your own, without violating HN's house rules?

replies(3): >>23359936 #>>23361129 #>>23367498 #
1. sytelus ◴[] No.23359936[source]
You cannot not have bias when you are talking politics. For Tweeter’s case, one would need to look at statistics for how many tweets from each sides are getting flagged. If one side is getting all the flake then it means that side is evil and other side is holy. In politics, this is not possible over long term if democracy is in full effect.