Slashdot Mirror


Blogger Incites Outcry Over Twitter Harassment

CNet is reporting that one blogger has started an outcry about harassment as it applies to Twitter. While their written stance appears to support the safeguarding of abuse, Twitter appears to be waffling on the issue when it comes to the hard line of enforcement. "The final response to Waldman's complaint from Twitter co-founder Biz Stone asserted that "Twitter is a communication utility, not a mediator of content," and that "Twitter recognizes that it is not skilled at judging content disputes between individuals. Determining the line between update and insult is not something that Twitter, nor a crowd, would do well. Stone added that Twitter's team would continue talking about which situations were appropriate for account banning."

146 comments

  1. Sock puppets? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh, the other Twitter.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    1. Re:Sock puppets? by Joe+U · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm going to go out on a limb and say both Twitters have a roughly equal amount of 'suck', but one of them might actually amount to something one day. (Hint: It's not going to be the M$ one)

    2. Re:Sock puppets? by erikina · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He will, if you keep giving him so much attention. He's a troll (and a damn successful one). Stop feeding him.

    3. Re:Sock puppets? by dedazo · · Score: 1
      You know when I saw this story for a second there - just for a tiny second - I thought it was April 1st and CmdrTaco was running a story about Slashdot's most prolific puppet master.

      Then I squinted and saw it was about the web site. So I piped down, took off my asbestos suit and continued my Friday manicure.

      --
      Web2.0: I love when people Flickr my cuil and digg my boingboing until my google is reddit and I start to yahoo
    4. Re:Sock puppets? by ResidntGeek · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      The problem with twitter, as I see it, is he's not a conventional troll. Behind the troll posts and stupidity I don't see a teenager trying to annoy people or an overzealous OSS supporter, I see someone who genuinely believes the stupid shit he posts, who really doesn't understand why everyone hates him having 10 usernames, who really has no idea how to properly maintain sockpuppets without blatantly self-promoting (and using the same writing style in each), and who really doesn't have much of a grasp on interpersonal skills. I could be wrong, of course, but just from reading his posts he doesn't seem like the type of troll who's deliberately attention-whoring, who'll go away if you ignore him. He seems like an asocial, obnoxious person who needs to be chewed out until he understands what he's doing wrong.

      --
      ResidntGeek
    5. Re:Sock puppets? by Joe+U · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He seems like an asocial, obnoxious person who needs to be chewed out until he understands what he's doing wrong. Yeah, every popular site has one. Some of us even have em in real life. People like that are boat anchors on any site with user generated content, they slow the site down and get a lot of crap stirred up in the process.
    6. Re:Sock puppets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > I could be wrong, of course

      No, you nailed it, pretty much. The only other thing to add here is that he is utterly and completely convinced that all his problems on Slashdot are the result of a massive conspiracy directed against him personally by Microsoft.

      The first few times I saw him make that argument I just sort of chuckled, but he is quite serious. He just knows that he is being modded down by evil agents of Microsoft intent on subverting Slashdot and his own personal freedom of speech.

      The idea that he might be incredibly obnoxious to a large percentage of his peers around here has probably never crossed his mind.

      It's almost unbelievable, but I think it's true. He does actually believe that.

    7. Re:Sock puppets? by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, I kept trying to figure out why the summary referred to Twitter using "their," and why CNet would care enough to write a whole story about a schizophrenic forum troll...

    8. Re:Sock puppets? by dreamchaser · · Score: 0, Redundant

      He also thinks that anyone who responds negatively to him is an MS astroturfer. I used to find it a bit amusing, now it just makes me sad for him. I agree that he really seems to believes in both the distortions he posts AND the massive conspiracy against him.

    9. Re:Sock puppets? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 0

      He seems like an asocial, obnoxious person who needs to be chewed out until he understands what he's doing wrong. Yeah, that's worked out great so far. [/sarcasm]
    10. Re:Sock puppets? by cyphercell · · Score: 0

      I think he works for microsoft.

      --
      Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
    11. Re:Sock puppets? by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Ahhh. Reverse psychology! I never considered that.

      No...on second thought I think he just has a brain mold. Tragic, really.

    12. Re:Sock puppets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he complained about becoming unemployed because of "M$ junk", so maybe he used to

    13. Re:Sock puppets? by cyphercell · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hi twitter! ~ Anonymous Coward is a well known twitter sock puppet.

      --
      Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
    14. Re:Sock puppets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone here likes to think they are aspies. Twitter&co sounds close.

    15. Re:Sock puppets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is misdirection. cycphercell is a known twitter sock puppet. Nice try.

    16. Re:Sock puppets? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      He's THAT guy, the one you all love to hate. The fact that he's able to stir things up shows that many of you do care in one way or another. I wouldn't call him a troll per se, maybe he's just a misguided idiot. There are others who are trolls in the purest sense of the word - the guy who posts that story about the library bathroom is a good example. Or the folks who post goatse links for their own sake.

      IWAPITUIGALAGTFU -> (I was a professional internet troll until I got a life and grew the fuck up)

    17. Re:Sock puppets? by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      Speaking of trolls, I just modded CmdrTaco -1 Troll. I am stinking drunk with power!

    18. Re:Sock puppets? by cyphercell · · Score: 1

      oh shit, there goes my karma!

      --
      Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
  2. Wow by Threni · · Score: 3, Interesting

    People really take this shit seriously. Why can't they just say `we don't care. If you think you're being harassed, go to the police. We make no changes to our code, or messages sent over it, without a court order. If you don't like it - stop using our service.`.

    1. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the smart ones already know this and the dumb ones will keep clicking those ads.

    2. Re:Wow by hansoloaf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      me thinks the "blogger" is just trying to maintain or increase traffic to her site - thinking she's somewhat important.

      One interesting tidbit is that she works for Pownce. I do know that this harassment started before she worked for Pownce. Yet I do see that the conflict of interest is in there now if she continues to press her case. She is free to close her twitter account and utilize pownce fully.

    3. Re:Wow by me+at+werk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      They'd love to, but when the community manager of Pownce (a twitter clone with a few more features) wants to sully the name of Twitter as Pownce is failing, you've gotta be a loud damsel in distress, don't you?

      --
      For context, click Parent.
    4. Re:Wow by aztektum · · Score: 1

      But that would mean making a potentially socially *devastating* move once Pownce is finally sucked all the way down the drain. She'd have to spend ALL that time going back to Twitter and looking like a twit

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    5. Re:Wow by murdocj · · Score: 1

      And if Twitter actually SAID that to start with, fine. But no, they said they would take action against users who harass other users, and then they sit on their hands. How about Twitter actually doing what they said they would do? Wild concept, no?

  3. Important part of TOS by conlaw · · Score: 4, Informative
    As stated in TFA, Twitter's TOS includes the following:

    [Twitter] may, but have no obligation to, remove content and accounts containing content that we determine in our sole discretion are unlawful, offensive, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene, or otherwise objectionable or violates any party's intellectual property, or these terms of use.
    In other words, they've left themselves an out for claims such as these.
    1. Re:Important part of TOS by erikina · · Score: 1

      Just like in all contracts I make: I may, but have not obligation to pay any tax or follow any law at my sole discretion.

      Sorry, doesn't work.

    2. Re:Important part of TOS by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Not following the law is, well... illegal.

      Not acting to prevent harassment on the Internet? Generally legal.

    3. Re:Important part of TOS by Mike89 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What I find funny is the complete double-standards of the internet community at large. eg. "OMG, Microsoft banned me because my gamertag seemed offensive, their ToS is stupid as!", then "OMG, Twitter won't enforce their ToS, that's stupid as!".

    4. Re:Important part of TOS by UncleTogie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      OMG, Microsoft banned me because my gamertag seemed offensive, their ToS is stupid as!", then "OMG, Twitter won't enforce their ToS, that's stupid as!".

      Ok, I'll bite... Stupid as what? ;)

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    5. Re:Important part of TOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's because the internet community at large isn't one being, it's made up of millions of individuals so yeah, of course you're going to find contradictory comments.

      It's almost like looking at the United States and then wondering aloud at how on one hand there are people who want more gun laws but on the other hand there are people who don't. Well duh, there is more than one mind at work.

      --cue snide remarks about the number of minds in America--

    6. Re:Important part of TOS by mmkkbb · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's funny that a community composed of millions has people who have opposite viewpoints.

      --
      -mkb
    7. Re:Important part of TOS by Mike89 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's funny that a community composed of millions has people who have opposite viewpoints.
      It's the same people, they just like to bitch whichever way they can this time.
    8. Re:Important part of TOS by Angostura · · Score: 1

      quit yer hitching!

    9. Re:Important part of TOS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except actually, there are only two of us: Cmdr Taco and Twitter - the rest are all fake accounts...

    10. Re:Important part of TOS by maxume · · Score: 1

      Sure it works. If you gave me a contract that said you didn't have any obligation to pay, I would laugh in your face and not sign it. Using the Twitter service is pretty much the opposite of not signing a contract.

      (they can't excuse themselves from actual legal obligations with the contract, but they aren't trying to, so it isn't a problem they have)

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  4. Overreaction by ady1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its a free service after all. If you don't like it then don't use it. Their TOS from TFA seem to suggest the same that they have no obligation to remove anything.

    1. Re:Overreaction by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You know what? I am sick and tired of hearing this kind of bullshit. Just because something is free doesn't mean they have the right to misrepresent themselves. Would it be ok if the soup line at the homeless shelter served dog shit? Would it be ok if the welfare system only gave you coupons for fried chicken because you are a "stupid nigger"? WOULD IT BE OK if the lifeguards didn't use the toilet, but pissed in your community swimming pool? No. Just because something is free doesn't give anyone the right to renig on their policies, to offer flat out bad products. And honestly, even if that WERE the case, piss on you. I have just as much right to bitch about it.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    2. Re:Overreaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh... Bad analogy. Community programs/properties aren't free, they're paid for by taxes.

    3. Re:Overreaction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, because those on welfare are paying into the system. And how about those homeless? You get good tax money from them!

    4. Re:Overreaction by Nullav · · Score: 1

      You make it sound as if we're all somehow 'entitled' to blog about what we had for dinner or what color we died our hair. I could hold out a bag of rabbit feces, but it doesn't mean you have to accept it.

      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    5. Re:Overreaction by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because those on welfare are paying into the system. And how about those homeless? You get good tax money from them!

      Yeah, because everyone knows that people on welfare never go to stores to buy food! And the homeless? They eat like kings for free!

      While they may not purchase things on the scale YOU do, don't assume that they purchase nothing. To put it another way: Go to your nearest store, buy a 20-oz soda, and then insist that you're tax-exempt 'cause you're on welfare or are homeless. See how far that'll take ya...

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
  5. Related: GetSatisfaction Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://getsatisfaction.com/twitter/topics/twitter_refuses_to_uphold_terms_of_service

    There are many people posting in this thread, some more ardently than others. Good points are dotted here and there. Of particular note are the two replies from Twitter employees. It's interesting how neither of them pull the "we have no obligation according to the TOS" card and how neither of them make any move to discredit the complaint.

    Is silence tantamount to agreement, in this case?

  6. Twitter co-founder Biz Stone? by jayhawk88 · · Score: 4, Funny

    What, was Max Power already taken?

    1. Re:Twitter co-founder Biz Stone? by me+at+werk · · Score: 1
      --
      For context, click Parent.
  7. Internet harassment? by mnemocynic · · Score: 1

    1. Close browser window.
    2. Turn off computer.
    3. Go outside.
    4. ???
    5. Profit!

  8. The point is this will lead to bad press by Basho · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There will no doubt be all sorts of threads here about whether Twitter has to remove content, if people are making too big a deal about this, comparisons to Flickr/YouTube/Microsoft(of course), etc... And of course LOTS of conversations about why Twitter is always down.

    But to me the real issue here is simple: This will make people say "If that is the way Twitter treats people, I'm moving on".

    A community-building site needs its community, otherwise it is just a php script sitting on a server somewhere. Piss off a vocal part of the community and eventually the tide will turn elsewhere.

  9. Links or it didn't happen. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As John Gruber has tweeted, this complainer hasn't shown us what tweets he's complaining about, yet he's got a mob of people raining condemnation on everyone involved. Maybe if we could see what's going on we'd have some way of sympathizing or at least believing there's a real problem.

  10. Okay, poop is coming out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll


    1. Re:Okay, poop is coming out by jaguth · · Score: 0

      "i'm a twitter shitter"

  11. Re:Sock puppets? Is it insightful or inciteful by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    that it seems they are harassing Twits,

    or is it harassment to say they are inciting Twits?

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  12. The comments that show she's lying. by me+at+werk · · Score: 4, Interesting
    There's a good comment there pointing out that this is all a bit of an attention whoring scheme (where's the full disclosure that the blogger crying out works for Pownce, a twitter competitor?), right here.

    #

    I have a list of 13 tweets that Ariel sent us as examples of the abuse from the account she wanted banned. According to our records, this is everything she sent us, except for those from the âoeconfessionsâ account, which Ariel says was not the main problem. (I couldnâ(TM)t look those up, because the posts themselves were deleted before we could look at them.)

    I would *love* to post the whole file of these examples. I think it would clear a lot of things up. Unfortunately, since this content is the source of all this strife, and itâ(TM)s now off the Internet, that seemsâ¦well, not quite right.

    What I will tell you is this:

    Out of these posts, exactly one mentions Ariel by name. It calls her âoeexperienced.â The others do not personally identify Ariel.

    One of them uses the word âoecuntâ (with a quote, presumably from Ariel). None contain either âoecrackâ or âoewhore.â None contain threats, physical or otherwise. Most are insults about physical or personality attributes without referring to anyone specifically. If you were following both Ariel and the account of this woman when these posts were made, it may have been clear who she was referring to. Out of that context, you would probably have no clue. But even if they would have mentioned Ariel by name, most of them are not actionable, because we donâ(TM)t have a rule against insulting people or hurting their feelings.

    Caveat: Many of the examples she sent us were from Flickr. I didnâ(TM)t look at all of these, becauseâ¦well, we donâ(TM)t run Flickr.

    Our stance is this: We stand by our TOS. We have deleted accounts for abuse of various kinds. We had to make a judgement call here, as one does in all such cases. This didnâ(TM)t meet the bar for being banned, in our opinion.

    You can disagree with our judgment call. And thatâ(TM)s fine. But youâ(TM)re choosing to do that without seeing the content, and someone has very carefully painted a picture that has misled many people. (One might ask why Ariel didnâ(TM)t post the full tweets in order to strengthen her case.)

    Even if you do disagree with our judgment call, this is not an argument about whether or not weâ(TM)re enforcing our TOS; this is an argument about how we define âoeharassmentâ or âoeabuse.â

    THAT IS ALL.
    # Evan Williams said on May 23rd, 2008 at 6:45 pm:

    One more thing:

    @Russ: âoeâ¦a lawsuit, seems to be a concern of yours correct?â

    No, not correct. That is a total red herring that was probably constructed to make us look like a cowardly corporation (clever!).

    Not that we canâ(TM)t be sued â" sure, we can. But that has not motivated our actions here.


    Now the content of the "Ariel says" comment:

    # Ariel Waldman Says:
    May 23rd, 2008 at 12:52 pm

    @ericabiz youâ(TM)re right and I have worked with kosso and thanked him in the past and I very much appreciated his objective understanding of the issue.

    I chose not to mention him because the majority of the harassment I reference was created by a different account than the one he had created and I didnâ(TM)t want to drag him through this.


    All preserved so that when they try to cover it up, slashdot has a backup.
    --
    For context, click Parent.
    1. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does this prove, exactly? He's not even showing what the tweets are. Why should we believe him?

    2. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by me+at+werk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It proves that there's no proof of any of the statements that were supposed to be heinous enough to fully remove the account. An account, I might add, anyone can post to (it was a "confessional" much like grouphug). So, easily, and I'm not saying this WAS the case, but others have postulated it's likely: she could have made the posts, reported them, and they were "caught" by the person running the confessional as being bad before the people at Twitter had the chance to look at them.

      It's like if I trolled myself as an AC...

      --
      For context, click Parent.
    3. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's calling out the blogger for not posting the posts in question, yet he doesn't do so himself. Please point out to me where this proof is, because I don't see it. I just see a guy who works for Twitter doing a lot of hand-waving.

    4. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by aztektum · · Score: 1

      To offer a different argument, that it isn't a "publicity stunt"...

      Her mommy chimed in saying that supposedly it's a real life stalker that is pestering her

      That said, my opinion is she is a bit of an attention whore. Oops is she going to try to get my /. account shut down?

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    5. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see what you did there, Me_At_Work.

    6. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there are so many garbled characters in your post. I've tried all the likely encodings, just what the hell encoding are you using to do that, and why?

    7. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by me+at+werk · · Score: 1

      I let the users do my work for me. I'm so web 2.0.

      --
      For context, click Parent.
    8. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by TheBracket · · Score: 1

      If the allegations contained in that post are true, wouldn't a restraining order against said stalker (or even charges of stalking w/o abuse) be more appropriate? It's ridiculously easy to get a restraining order in most jurisdictions of the US.

      --
      Lead developer, http://wisptools.net
    9. Re:The comments that show she's lying. by me+at+werk · · Score: 1

      Apparently Western (ISO-8859-1), but they're weird to me too. I just copy pasted them directly from my viewport on the link provided. I didn't see the weird characters in the paste or in the preview, but after submission it was there.

      I would edit it but slashdot doesn't provide any edit window.

      --
      For context, click Parent.
  13. LOLOUTRAGE!!!11!!1 by sakusha · · Score: 1

    I am tired of people using teh Interwebs to incite outrage over something on teh Interwebs.

    Don't like flamers on Twitter? Don't use it.

    1. Re:LOLOUTRAGE!!!11!!1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You guys, seriously, there is drama on teh internets! Why won't you listen to meeeeeeeeeeee???? Come ON! I'm entitled to attention! All of it! Me me me me me!

    2. Re:LOLOUTRAGE!!!11!!1 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HEY! Settle down you! Teh internets is serious business!!!1

  14. Harassment on Twitter: by 88NoSoup4U88 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I assume harassment on Twitter consists of pre-twittering someone's intention of going for a shit?

    Or is it being Twit-rolled

  15. Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by Cathoderoytube · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When you're dealing with the level of stupid that feels the need to post updates of whatever mundane crap they're doing at every moment of the day you're going to have to expect to attract a large number of other stupids. I'll say that MAYBE twitter really isn't an integral part of the internet, or blogosphere or whatever so much as it is an exercise in self absorbed gobshittery. I guess that's what 'web 2.0' is supposed to be though.

    Considering the individual in this case is a 'popular blogger' she should expect some bloody hate mail. I'm sure she gets plenty of lovey dovey crap from her followers as well, and they're all doing their very best to send her emails with smiley faces so she'll feel all good about having a blog and a twitter account.

    I for one welcome hatred! That's why I'm not posting this anonymously :)

    --
    I have nothing compelling to say
    1. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by hyades1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I understand they're planning a somewhat less "me-centric" version of Twitter for people who still have room in their heads for at least one thought per day that isn't strictly related to themselves.

      I believe they're going to call it "Wanker".

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
    2. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by that_itch_kid · · Score: 1

      This is why I love maddox. He tells it like it is.

      http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=banish

      Incidentally, she should just do with her hate mail what maddox does with his:

      http://maddox.xmission.com/hatemail.cgi?p=1

    3. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by The+Good+Reverend · · Score: 3, Funny

      Who pissed in your corn flakes?

      Why do you care so much if other people use a web service, update their friends/family/strangers with important or unimportant facts, and generally have a presence on the web? Does it REALLY affect you so much that you have to rant about it online? Do you have to resort to personal attacks on someone whom you've never met, never read, and don't care about?

      I'll never understand the hate some people have about other people using the internet.

    4. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by UnrefinedLayman · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth, I use Twitter so I can update my girlfriend about what I'm doing (for example, if I'm going to be playing Civilization I'll tweet as much so she knows I can't hear the phone and that I'll be busy for a few hours). Not all of us are self-absorbed assholes who feel everything about us is important enough for everyone else to know.

    5. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by UncleTogie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do you have to resort to personal attacks on someone whom you've never met, never read, and don't care about?

      I have a question here....

      If they've never met them, never read their work/read about them, and don't care about them....

      ...how is it "personal"? Jus' asking...

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    6. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by Cathoderoytube · · Score: 1

      It's the messy business we call the exchange of ideas and opinions. I figure anybody who feels to need to post how they're having their cornflakes on the internet is a self absorbed gobshite. This is the sort of inane crap you associate with celebrity gossip rags.

      Like did you hear?! Some idiot who runs a blog I've never heard about till she filed a lawsuit because the internet wasn't going her way just bought a new box of tampons!! I can't wait for the next update!!

      --
      I have nothing compelling to say
    7. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by zanaxagoras · · Score: 1

      Why do you care so much if other people use a web service, update their friends/family/strangers with important or unimportant facts, and generally have a presence on the web? Does it REALLY affect you so much that you have to rant about it online? Do you have to resort to personal attacks on someone whom you've never met, never read, and don't care about? The answer is yes. And the rants over which you are clearly so offended are in fact the well-deserved ridicule that silly people doing silly things in public should come to expect.
    8. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you have to resort to personal attacks on someone whom you've never met, never read, and don't care about?

      I have a question here....



      If they've never met them, never read their work/read about them, and don't care about them....



      ...how is it "personal"? Jus' asking...

      personal: "Having to do with the character, personality, intimate affairs, conduct, etc. of a certain person"

      In other words, it's personal by the very definition of the word. Troll.
    9. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      "Having to do with the character, personality, intimate affairs, conduct, etc. of a certain person."

      ...so you're suggesting that those qualities can be deduced if one has not, once again, ever met them, ever read their work/read about them, and doesn't care about them?

      If you'd never read a post of mine or met me, then you'd know nothing of my character, personality, intimate affairs, or conduct. Nothing personal.

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    10. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by maxume · · Score: 1

      If you were aiming for that irony, beautiful. If you weren't, that's beautiful too.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    11. Re:Self absorbed gobshites 2.0 by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I'll say that MAYBE twitter really isn't an integral part of the internet, or blogosphere or whatever so much as it is an exercise in self absorbed gobshittery.


      I'll admit that I use Twitter. I decided to check it out when the jQuery team announced that they would be twittering. I use it as a "multiple IM" type of thing. If I want to send basically the same short IM to a few friends, I'll Twitter it. If I want to make a long, detailed point, I'll e-mail it. In fact, the Twitter client I use (Twhirl) helps make Twitter seem like another IM system.

      In the end, Twitter is just another tool in my online arsenal (along with my IM client, feed reader, web browser, e-mail client, web site/blog, etc). Like any tool, though, it can be abused. Those people who feel the need to Twitter about every second of their existence definitely fit your description of Twitter. Don't judge the tool by those who abuse it, though.
      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  16. Well you know... by Monkey_Genius · · Score: 1

    You can't fix stupid.

    --
    I've got your sig, right here.
    1. Re:Well you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >You can't fix stupid.

      Sure you can - all it takes is a loaded shotgun.

      Problem is, it only fixes stupid one at a time.

  17. Ariel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, the other Twitter. Looks like she fabricated a lot of lies and little of the truth. Evan Wiliams of Twitter.com posted the truth of what happened http://www.zeldman.com/2008/05/22/a-tweet-too-far/#comment-37320
  18. Psh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People only care because the supposed blogger is hot.

    1. Re:Psh. by Gewalt · · Score: 1

      +1 sad but true

      When I first read her whiny slice of webdrama, I was tempted to call her out on being a primadonna in search of attention. Then I googled her name (as she said her search results were ruined) looking for this ruination, and all I found was links to her hotness. So ya... she's uh.. STILL a prima donna in search of attention, but um... hot too.

      --
      Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    2. Re:Psh. by Gewalt · · Score: 1

      Oh ya, tagged: crackwhore cunt and primadonna

      --
      Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    3. Re:Psh. by Icarium · · Score: 1

      Huh? Either google is playing mind games, or we have very different standards of hot.

      Granted, I wouldn't run away screaming in terror.

  19. EV Williams of Twitter clarifies the truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >>>has very carefully painted a picture that has misled many people. (One might ask why Ariel didnâ(TM)t post the full tweets in order to strengthen her case.)

    http://www.zeldman.com/2008/05/22/a-tweet-too-far/#comment-37320

    1. Re:EV Williams of Twitter clarifies the truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see any clarification there. Where's his proof?

  20. The problem is... by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 5, Insightful

    She's pissed that someone called her a crack-whore looking cunt.

    Here's how I see it: She looks like a crack whore, and all this bitching about being called a name makes her a cunt. Meaning: She's a crack whore looking cunt.

    She's an 'internet celebrity' (I guess) and decided to use her real information in her accounts. Next, she made her Flickr account known to all, and also posted skanky pictures in it. And when someone called her out on it, she cried.

    She could easily stop using it, since it's just ego masturbation anyway. "Look at all the people who care that I'm brushing my teeth!"

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    1. Re:The problem is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Crack-whore cunt is an opinion and opinions are protected. If the guy was tracking her down and painting it on her car or her apartment walls in human blood, then we've got a problem. Crying because someone said you have pointy knees on the internet makes you a fucktard.

      Like I mentioned above, she seems to be suffering what recent studies out of the university of North Carolina show - which is that women who are full of themselves (THINK they are more attractive) tend to also claim they are victims of bullying and harassment. So unless this guy is going above and beyond anything we've usually seen on the internet in his comments (and by that, I mean intimidating her as if he's going ot hunt her down or knows where she lives or something), then this chick just needs to shut up.

      And why is it that it's always some woman running around crying about how the oh so mysoginistic masses of males are making her want to quit the internet and take her ball home with her, like that Java woman? What, like men aren't stalked and harassed online by fucking nutty cunts? I've personally been the victim of flat out stalking, intimidation, blackmail and threats online by both a male and a female at different times. But I don't go around making ridiculosu biased claims about one sex or the other because of it.

      I guess my general feeling would be that there is usually little reasonable cause for making an internet wide call for pity on yourself and that except in rare cases of true harassment and stalking, people need to either deal with it or accept that they suck at intartubes and go home.

    2. Re:The problem is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      GTFO, this isn't flamebait. Somebody please mod this back up.

    3. Re:The problem is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      And you are a misogynist.

    4. Re:The problem is... by mpesce · · Score: 1

      Wow. I haven't read such a misogynist comment on Slashdot since...um...maybe... ever?

      Repeating the slanders - and justifying them - is just, well, it's wrong. It's bad behavior. And it's not to the point of the original post. It's what's known as an 'ad hominem' attack.

      And somehow this got modded to '5 - Insightful'. Which means there are a few other people out there who are clearly just as misogynist. That's even more disturbing, because had I points today, this would have been modded down to '-1 - Troll'.

      Please, please try to be kind. Someday you might be a celebrity, yourself.

    5. Re:The problem is... by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      And? If you're a 'celebrity' and you can't handle people talking about you, drop out of the public eye. She accepted a job that put her name and face out there, and someone decided to troll her. Instead of ignoring it, she cried to Twitter. When they said "Ignore it," she cried to Digg. Digg front paged it and people thought "aww poor baby." They should have been thinking "why doesn't she walk away" or "turn the other cheek and grow up."

      And if the person complaining was a guy, I'd say the same thing. Grow up. You're an adult now. Welcome to the grown up world where people call other people names.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    6. Re:The problem is... by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      I haven't read such a misogynist comment on Slashdot since

      Huh? I didn't see anything that was misogynistic. Dickish? Sure. But I don't recall a comment implying the poster possesses a hatred of women. This woman in particular, maybe, but not women in general.

      Now, if the poster had said "Woman love to bitch, and that makes them cunts", *that* would've been misogynistic.

  21. Re:who gives a shit? by erikina · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've heard of not reading the article, but perhaps you should read the summary. Hint: They're talking about the micro-blogging service.

  22. ahm i know her problem by FudRucker · · Score: 2, Funny

    she is just twitterpated...

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  23. Twitter and Twitter: A comparison by that_itch_kid · · Score: 1

    One is a large collection of 14-year olds screaming, bitching, and generally harrassing and trolling as many people as they can.

    The other is some blogging site.

  24. wrong twitter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (see subject)

  25. lulz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh man I'm going to go post this information in /b/!!!

  26. Rules 1 and 2. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your 4chan Gold Account has been revoked.

  27. simple by nguy · · Score: 1

    Is it libelous? Is it threatening? If it's neither, there is no legal grounds to remove it.

    Twitter may decide that they "don't want to be that kind of service", but that's their business decision, as is how they proceed against TOS violaters, or whether they do at all.

  28. Inciting outrage? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 4, Funny

    One blogger whining about 'harassment' gets a few supporting comments on her post, and she's 'inciting outrage'?

    Must be a web 2.0 thing.

  29. Brain Mold by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

    It seems that OUR twitter is infected with a rare brain mold that only grows in Mom's basement. Don't blame him, pity him instead. The mold is slowly frying his synapses one by one.

    1. Re:Brain Mold by Joe+U · · Score: 1

      It seems that OUR twitter is infected with a rare brain mold that only grows in Mom's basement. Don't blame him, pity him instead. The mold is slowly frying his synapses one by one. So, we need a name. Do we call it Stallman's disease, Linusitis, Ballmeria?

      We can ask for a slashdot poll if we get enough.
    2. Re:Brain Mold by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Twitteritis? Ballmerphobia? Fanboi Disease?

  30. you don't get to make a contract with the IRS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is obviously news to you

  31. The Internet: by Slaytanic213 · · Score: 0

    Serious Business

    She just started her blog in February 2008.
    Welcome to the inter.. strike that..

    She is in "Marketing and Advertising".
    As Bill Hicks would say, "just kill yourself."

    attention whore

    --
    *Satan Laughs As You Eternally Rot*
  32. She's just calling attention to it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had never heard of her, but now I know exactly what this guy thinks of her . . .

  33. You're over 18 -- act like it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's stated that twitter is not for use by people under 18. In other words, it's for adults.

    What happened to being an adult and taking care of yourself?

    Let's review what evidence is available thus far:

    NO personal information was posted. No phone number, no social security number, no address, no work information -- hell, HER OWN WEBPAGE has more personal information.

    NO specific threats of violence or harm.

    NO statements that even remotely resembled anything of that nature.

    From the evidence available, the person was subjected to no more than what any CHILD deals with on the schoolyard.

    This is basically the equivalent of crying to mommy to punish that meanie who called you a poopie-head.

    (Again, this is going by the evidence available -- if there were actually anything more dangerous (e.g. posting an address, phone number, etc.) then surely she would have posted some evidence from the beginning, or even now, right?)

  34. Re:who gives a shit? by Basho · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Hm, I don't get your point, really. Twitter is a micro-blogging site, got that. But people post micro-blog postings ( Tweets ) with the intention that someone else will be following those micro-blog posts. That's why I called it a community: people connected to other people.

    So if a vocal subset of those people stand by their friends and leave Twitter for WHATEVER reason, the network starts to fall apart - once more people I'm interested in connecting with move elsewhere Twitter will be less interesting to me, and I'm more likely to move, dragging my legion of 29 followers with me...

  35. Re:who gives a shit? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahahahahahahahahahha. 'tard.

  36. Re:Nothing massive here. by cyphercell · · Score: 1

    Hello twitter! I have an honest to god question. Do you realize that your posting patterns fit the definition of psychotic paranoia? I mean seriously, not everyone that disagrees with you could possibly work for microsoft. I've had a bout or two in the past and I can attest that a little trip to BH can be a good thing.

    peace

    --
    Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
  37. wtf? by acvh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    she's a "social-media insights consultant" here's an insight, free of charge: get a real life.
  38. Re:Nothing massive here. by ResidntGeek · · Score: 1

    Where do you live, twitter? I'd love to meet you and see if you're like this in meatspace.

    Hah! Kidding, of course. My employer and I know EXACTLY where you live. I'm taking over your file tomorrow; I'll be checking up on you.

    --
    ResidntGeek
  39. Re:Nothing massive here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I'd love to meet you and see if you're like this in meatspace.

    Will is *exactly* like that, except that he uses less swear words because in the real world he might find himself knocked out instead of modded down.

    But that's pretty much him alright. Just ask anyone that used to work at Computer Heaven in Baton Rouge about 5 years ago.

  40. Re:Nothing massive here. by causality · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know because I have been playing the dreadfully easy, multiple account game.

    It's about time you 'fessed up to that.

    The bottom line is that you are worse than ineffective, you are counter productive. You are on the losing side the free software battle and making things worse for yourself. Insult and disruption are empty.

    I have used Linux for nearly eleven years. Not once have I felt that there is a "battle" between Microsoft and Free Software. I agree that Microsoft makes shitty products; that's why I don't use them. It's such a simple thing: I don't like their products and I don't like their business practices so I contribute to neither. If someone does like their products and does use them, I will tell them that I think there are better alternatives if they are interested. If they are not, I wish them well and I celebrate their right (and obligation) to make their own choices and live with the consequences. If this results in their having a worse computing experience than me, it is unfortunate but it is also not my problem.

    A big reason why I have so thoroughly enjoyed Linux is because I am not afraid of learning something new. I am always glad to expand my knowledge, especially when something interests me, because I greatly prefer this over ignorance. To me, there are many wonderous things in the world and there is an element of adventure in overcoming something I did not previously understand. So, when I encountered Linux in mid-1997, I read books, man pages, Internet forums, HOWTOs, and pretty much anything I could get my hands on. It absolutely fascinated me, both the elegant design of the system and the philosophy of freedom that was behind it. At the time I kept a Windows 98 partition to play a couple of Windows games; when I noticed that a year went by without me once booting up Windows, I formatted it with an ext2 filesystem and never looked back. I love the design, reliability, and feeling of control that Linux gives me. It does not get in my way. It does not assume that I'm an idiot. If something breaks, it broke for a good reason, it will stay broken until I fix it and when I fix it, it will stay fixed. Linux is easily one of the best things that ever could have happened to my computing experience and my general interest in technology.

    However, I do not believe that the average person is going to appreciate these attributes. There is unfortunately a strong anti-intellectual, anti-learning culture, at least in the USA. There exists the idea that the path of least resistance is the secret to a good and happy life, and by extension there is the idea that learning something new is painful and too much work and should be avoided whenever possible. The fact that I believe this to be a lie is not relevant, no matter how much I wish it were. The average person is not going to enjoy the design of Linux or the love of freedom that is behind it. What I am talking about has very little to do with computing, despite the specific application about which I am speaking, but is a general attitude towards life. However much I may disagree with what I consider to be a dehumanizing form of laziness, I must respect that people need to live their own lives the way they see fit. A corporation like Microsoft that promises "it will just work with little to no effort -- now easier to use than EVER!" is always going to appeal to this culture. People who do not wish to expand their knowledge and enjoy the tools they use every day are going to buy into it. To them, it is "the way things are"; to me, they are making their choice and living with the consequences.

    If you really think that what you are doing is battling a corporation because you dislike their products and their business practices, it is because you fail to consider and understand the foundation upon which it is built. Microsoft is not the cause of much of anything. In a manner of speaking, the things

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  41. Re:Nothing massive here. by Rycross · · Score: 1

    Wow, you seriously think you're important enough that Microsoft would hire people to down-mod you on Slashdot?

    I'd like to know where people got this idea that Microsoft hires people to try and game Slashdot. Seems like nothing more than paranoia.

  42. Re:who gives a shit? by erikina · · Score: 1

    Read the post I was replying to. He thought the article was about a slashdot troll (named Twitter and his sock-puppets).

  43. Re:Nothing massive here. by n3r0.m4dski11z · · Score: 0

    Awesome. Bonus for getting an entire discussion to start off with you

    --
    -
  44. Re:Nothing massive here. by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It would not surprise me to learn that you work for M$ or some kind of PR firm under their hire

    That's because it would really make you feel better if you could honestly discover that to be true. You want it to be true, because you're so invested in that fantasy that if you ever admit to yourself that it's a delusion, the psychic pain it will cause will really hurt you. Deep down, you rationally know that, but because you're afraid of the pain that will come with the shame of admitting you've been weaving a paranoid fantasy all this time, you just build up that house-of-cards narrative all the higher. Every comment you read about your own disconnected world view is just another card you're adding to the stack, because you find the habit of defending that broken world view to be - despite being actually badly damaged and damaging - just a case of inertia. You're so latched onto your fiction that your only constructive activity, now, is to add to it... and just make matters worse.

    but it does not matter. No one here cares or listens, except to reflect, "Yeah, that's what M$ does to people who bad mouth them."

    Except, that's not true, and you know it's not true. That's actually a lie. And you know it. And yet you repeat it, over and over again. I know you won't be able to actually address it such, and that's OK. You do, internally, know it. The only thing that's a shame is that someone who doesn't know better may actually have their reasoned understanding of a given situation on which you comment temporarily delayed, as they spend a little time dissecting your ramblings, and comparing them to reality. You've already decided to waste your life pretending that reality is different than it actually is. It's just unfortunate that your willingness to spend so much time at it - in a vain attempt to make it appear that you're sincere and being honest about it - may drag some other person, however briefly, into your unhappy relationship with reality. Ah, well.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  45. Re:Nothing massive here. by Kalriath · · Score: 2, Informative

    You are on the losing side the free software battle and making things worse for yourself. Battle? What battle? You know, I've never even seen the Free Software Foundation try to claim there's some kind of battle. Yet you (and folks like PJ at Groklaw) seem to believe that Freedom of Choice in software is good, so long as it's the same as your choice.

    And before you trot out the "M$ Shill" line, no I don't get paid by Microsoft. I work for the government in my country, and we're encouraged to consider Open Source in our "purchasing" decisions, and in fact we even use it - our IT department even encourages Firefox usage (because, well, IE is bloody difficult to use!) and our government has even proposed RFCs and contributes to Open Source itself.
    --
    For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
  46. Re:Nothing massive here. by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1

    Wow, you are serious. Sounds like the few posters who identified you as actually believing what you write were right... That's amazing. I didn't think someone could be that delusional.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  47. Because it's not a community at all by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    Well, maybe because the "Internet community" isn't even a community at all. It's just a bunch of unrelated people who use the same network. There is no single topic, interest, point of view, etc, which would be shared among all members of that supposed "community".

    It's bit like claiming that USA by mid-1800's had complete double standards. "OMG, slavery is protected by the constitution and an integral part of our way of life." Then in the same day, "OMG, slavery is an abomination and the constitution doesn't really endorse it." Well, yes, because it was different people.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  48. Go outside by Harmonious+Botch · · Score: 1

    But...but...outside has bluescreened! I'll wait for it to reboot

  49. Re:Nothing massive here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh. My. God.

  50. Re:Nothing massive here. by ResidntGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I have been playing the dreadfully easy, multiple account game.
    Incorrect. What you've been doing is demonstrating aptly how dreadfully easy the multiple account game isn't. You've had something like 10 sockpuppets which you've used in the clumsiest of fashions and which have been quickly called out as such. You've shown no ability at all to conceal your intentions, change your writing style, post with different temporal patterns with different accounts, post in separate threads with different accounts, or otherwise in any way avoid notice. You've even had several conversations (that I've seen) with yourself, containing blatant self-promotion despite the fact that several people were actively pointing out that you were conversing with yourself.

    You, of all people, should realize how absurd it would be to think all these people responding negatively to your stupidities are the same person.
    --
    ResidntGeek
  51. Re:Nothing massive here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is hardly the first time he's posted this "M$ is hateing me" childish rant.

    He has some serious issues. Unfortunately he really believes he is doing good to Free Software. As an honest advocate myself, I wish he'd just stop.

  52. Re:Nothing massive here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes? Twitter, I am here.

  53. Pathetic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a girl whose claim to fame is that she's "famous within Web 2.0 bubbles" or somesuch nonsense.

    You know, at a certain point, you get a life. And what I mean is, if "Twitter" (whatever that is) does something you don't like, then go elsewhere. This idea that the web is like real life reminds me that people need to get out of the house more, outside. Live a little. The internet is not life, and life is not the internet.

    People "famous" on the web reminds me of little kids who learn all the names of dinosaurs because it's something they can impress the adults with.

    If people started to harass me on slashdot, i'd ignore it or go elsewhere.

    I still trying to wrap my head around being "famous" because you "blog". It's a niche within a niche. It's pathetic beyond words.

  54. MOD PARENT UP. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Or you are just yet another little fucktard who thinks they matter and that the world gives one shit about you in any way shape or form.

    Thats the lesson for today kids. If you get upset over shit you dont have to read. On a screen you can turn off. you ARE a fucktard. please kill yourself so the general noise level of the universe will drop a tiny tiny tiny bit.

  55. Re:Nothing massive here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    holy christ, who modded this INTERESTING??? wtf is wrong with you people?

  56. and wtf is? by bin'home'etc · · Score: 1

    a "social-media insights consultant"?

    If I understand it correctly it means, according to Wikipedia, "someone who is too lazy/stupid to get a real job. Who wants to sit around all day, playing with their Mac (what else?) and waste time on dumb pointless sites like Twitter."

    I forgot, she's a "sort of celebrity".

    Which means no one's ever heard of her.

    At the end of the day, who gives a shit?

    Grow up, get out into the real world with real responsibilities to concern you.

    Oh no, perhaps I'm harassing her now as well!

    More toys thrown out of the pram in another fit of immature petulance.

  57. Read a book by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good grief. Twitter harassment. Turn off your Twitter for a few days and read a book. Or, exit home and interact with a human on the street. There is a whole world out there waiting for your. You are more than Twitter.

  58. Get a life by home-electro.com · · Score: 1

    I say:

    Girl, get a life. This "online harassment" shit is nonsense, just don't use the twitter anymore. That's it, problem solved.

    I witnessed a number of "online wars" on several online communities. Some people just take it way too seriously. But it is really very childish.

    1. Re:Get a life by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      AMEN.

  59. Re:Nothing massive here. by Joe+U · · Score: 1

    holy christ, who modded this INTERESTING??? Obviously, it was the great GPL conspiracy coming to the defense of their valiant knight Twitter. They are in constant battle with the forces of the M$ for the supremacy of the cyberverse.

    wtf is wrong with you people? Um, I just said, it's the great GPL conspiracy. That speaks volumes in itself.
  60. Is that what you meant? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "While their written stance appears to support the safeguarding of abuse,..."
    How morally reprehensible. Abuse should never be safeguarded.

  61. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  62. Re:Nothing massive here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yhbt, hand

  63. Re:Nothing massive here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    twitter prepares to do battle with the evil Micro$oft!

  64. Re:Nothing massive here. by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

    LOL. Angry? You make me laugh and give me amusement. Not in a derisive way either; in a comic way.

    If you ever actually followed my posting history you'd see me critical of MS when due, and as a proponent of free and open source software when it makes sense. I also own *gasp* Apple products!

    I'm a projects and operations manager for a large IT services firm. Sure I work with lots of MS stuff. I also work with lots of OSS stuff. I'm basically neutral about such things, as opposed to your brand of near religious zealotry.

    They are tools dude, not a religion. Peace.

  65. Re:Nothing massive here. by Stanistani · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Twitter:

    You lost me at M$.

    That's how angsty thirteen-year-olds label Microsoft.

    Just as anti-open source folks call it 'open sores' or label its propenents as filthy, stinking hippies.

    You're a pimple on the face of free speech.

    Meanwhile, to the other folks... do we need to drag this troll into every discussion of the microblogging software of the same name?