Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Says It's Beating the Trolls (betanews.com)

Mark Wilson writes: After making it easier to report abusive tweets and increasing the size of its anti-troll team, Twitter believes it is getting 'bad behavior' under control. As well as bullying of acquaintances and work colleagues, Twitter has also been used to attack celebrities, the gay community, religious groups, and more, with many people feeling driven from the site. It seems that the decision to take a very hands-on approach to troll tackling is starting to pay off. The head of Twitter in Europe, Bruce Daisley, says that the tools that have been introduced have had a real impact on trolling. He goes further, saying that there is a direct correlation between the release of new safety tools and reporting mechanisms, and the drop in unacceptable behavior.

17 of 214 comments (clear)

  1. "Beating the trolls" is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    From what I've read, Twitter is infact censoring some tweets, depending on the terminology used.
    Apparently several gamergate people have been for lack of a better word "shadowbanned" or words which are trending are deliberately not showing up.

    Say what you will about Gamergate (it's certainly a stupid name) - there's some real dipshits involved with it, who've said some ghastly shit.
    There's *ALSO* some perfectly sane people who've said some quite intelligent things, however one side of the debate has succeeded in altering history and current time, by somehow managing to label the entire group, virtually terrorists, including lying about what's been said or done, claiming they are "in the right" regardless of what the other people say, dismissing things that people say because of who they are (strawman) and so on.

    It's been quite eye opening to watch actually and one thing I have noticed which I wouldn't have before, is that I have a far, FAR more skeptical eye on things in the regular and gaming media. It's opened my eyes HUGELY, in how things are reported. "X is bad, X did this, X said this" etc, when some of those things are utterly impossible to prove, outright incorrect, or labeling an entire group for one persons actions - been an educational year.

    FWIW: I'd align myself as closer to GG than not, but certainly not "active" more a casual observer in it all.

    As for twitter censoring and this news article, as I stated, I've heard multiple times in the past 6 months, certain things are simple not being made visible due to who they are or what's being said, even if it's not offensive - use the wrong hashtag, prepare for potential censorship.

    Note: Posting anonymously, as usual with any gamergate discussion of any kind, lest "the good nice guys" harass and dox me (but that side is infallible and that's never occurred before, honest!)

    1. Re: "Beating the trolls" is it? by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      its still censorship, its just legal censorship. they have the right to set the rules on their site that is 100% correct. but its not fair to claim its not censorship

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    2. Re: "Beating the trolls" is it? by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

      its still censorship, its just legal censorship. they have the right to set the rules on their site that is 100% correct. but its not fair to claim its not censorship

      I'm an atheist. I don't demand equal time with the priest in church, if they want a forum by Christians for Christians that's fine and I don't consider it censorship but don't call it public debate. It's when you've driven away all the dissenting opinions by forced registration, real name policies, labeling them "trolls" and moderating them away and still pretend that what you have is a public debate that I disagree. It's a sanitized, whitewashed debate where hardly anybody would voice personal information or opinions their family, friends, employer, landlord or anybody else would take offense from.

      And not because they're doing anything wrong, if you interviewed one of the daughters of Muslim immigrants on equality of the sexes, hijab, forced marriage, female genital mutilation etc. I bet roughly 99% would give different answers under promise of anonymity than under full name, published for the world and everyone they know to see. Just because the government isn't going to throw me in jail over it, doesn't make free speech advisable.

      It's probably true that you get more hateful opinions with anonymity/pseduo-anonymity, but I don't think there's any reason to believe they're less true. There's a saying at least in Norway "from children and drunken men you hear the truth" and I think that is because they don't think about consequences. The emperor's new clothes and all that. The only free exchange of opinion is the one free from consequence, the question is if you want to hear it or not. And the world is trending towards no, thank you.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re: "Beating the trolls" is it? by ArylAkamov · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Speech comes with certain responsibilities. Not shouting fire in a theatre, for example. If you can't express your controversial ideas without trolling then you need to take responsibility and improve your writing skills.

      The problem is stating /any/ controversial opinions is called "trolling" now.

    4. Re: "Beating the trolls" is it? by arth1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Trolling is an attempt to prevent debate and the exercising of free speech.

      No, trolling is the attempt to elicit a reaction and have people make fools of themselves in front of others.

      It is often disruptive, but I cannot say I have heard of a single case of trolling intended "to prevent debate and the excercising[sic] of free speech".

      It's not actually that hard. You can express controversial views politely, without trolling.

      Hardly. It doesn't matter how polite you are, if the topic does not sit well with consensus. You will know that your views will be attacked without anyone reading and trying to understand them, no matter how polite you are. And knowing that, the only purpose would be trolling.

      That being said, I do not necessarily see it as a bad thing. People being goaded by someone sincere, polite and humble can be a beauty to watch, especially when it leads to people attacking conclusions no one drew or opinion no one held.
      In my opinion it is an underrated art form, much like sarcasm that is obvious to everyone except the recipient.

    5. Re: "Beating the trolls" is it? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I completely disagree.

      A public debate isn't a free-for-all where anyone can say anything. If you don't eject the trolls then the trolls will drive people away. You've still got the de-facto censorship which you claim prevents public debate except now new the targets of censorship are chosen by the nastiest, craziest faction.

      You are falsely equating doing nothing with being open. That's unfortunately not the case: you're just letting someone else do the closing for you.

      You're picture of public discourse sounds more or less equivalent to perfect freedom: it can't exist because... Well, the perfect freedom debate is long hashed over and I expect I'm unlikely to give you new insights to that.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    6. Re: "Beating the trolls" is it? by fey000 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, this is basic SJW stuff.

      "I cannot dispute your argument, so I'll pretend it doesn't exist and try ad hominems instead."

      It's not so much trolling as just funny and/or sad.

    7. Re:"Beating the trolls" is it? by martinux · · Score: 4, Informative

      GamerGate supporters complained that she was receiving favourable coverage from a person who is credited as a beta tester for her game and who gave her money.
      https://archive.is/WtK25
      https://archive.is/QwJbc
      https://archive.is/mrVxK
      http://blogjob.com/oneangrygam...

      ""Special thanks for their amazing support during a really difficult time. This game would have been dead in the water months ago without you all." Nathan Grayson included." https://archive.is/AGml8#selec...

      Media outlets, invested in the harassment narrative, published articles claiming that GamerGate made the false claim that Grayson reviewed her game.

      Misinformation is terribly easy to spread, especially when there are people who will treat hearsay as fact. Your comment is at -1 flamebait which you could take as a sign that poorly researched claims based on a false narrative aren't valued on /.

  2. Yeah, right by sunderland56 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So they're cracking down on common everyday trolls. But, racist/misogynistic/hateful tweets are just fine, if you're a presidential candidate.

  3. Ok... by MikeRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And here's a serious question. Why wasn't that Minnesota politician who doxxed her complaining constituents banned from Twitter? It made national headlines because she was taking a self-righteous "herp derp, take that you racists" view of perfectly sane, non-racist complaints that she was siding with Black Lives Matter as they planned to disrupt access to an airport and the Mall of America.

    Then she takes her account private. You want to drive these trolls off social media? When they do stuff like that, block them from privacy. Make every dirty, rotten thing they've said public.

  4. Slashdot Forgot the Censorship and YRO Icons by Kunedog · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why didn't the earlier story about internet freedom make any mention of this Twitter banfest, Slashdot? Why was there never a /. story about Vice (where the internet freedom story came from) itself hypocritically silencing the masses by wiping out its own comments section, ensuring that only themselves and approved plebians will have a voice on their site?

    Why was there never a /. story about the ridiculous UN Women/Broadband propaganda report that tried to promote the idea of "cyber-violence" (an awkardly obvious pretense to a desired government crackdown) which proved so embarassing that they had to pull it from public view (and no /. story when that happened either).

    It's abundantly clear that there's an activist arm of the tech news media (which Slashdot, sadly, clearly wants to be part of) that isn't anti-censorship or anti-bullying at all, as long as they get to be (or choose) the approved bullies and censors.

  5. Censorship isn't limited to governments. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't know where the fuck this only-governments-can-commit-censorship concept came from, but it's total bullshit.

    Yes, if a government limits the ability of somebody to express some idea, it is censorship.

    If a corporation limits the ability of somebody to express some idea, it is, guess what, censorship!

    And if an individual limits the ability of somebody to express some idea, once again it is censorship.

    The parties involved don't matter; censorship refers to the action of suppressing what others express.

    Anyone can commit censorship. Anyone can be a victim of censorship.

    And while some social media provider may have the right to remove content from their system, that doesn't mean it isn't censorship.

    It's still censorship, because the expression of somebody else is being suppressed or eliminated.

    Anyone who claims such suppression isn't censorship because it's being done by a private party is a fucking idiot.

    1. Re:Censorship isn't limited to governments. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let the children argue, they'll figure it out.

      I've followed this GG thing since about Jan. Most of the followers on both sides are 14-22. They're quick to throw out something 'deep' they heard. XKCD made a comic that they all take as truth. What he meant to say was the "First Amendment" not "Free Speech".

      It's just the children fighting. I'll take twitter's announcement like I would have taken a Usenet admin's word on "We've fixed the trolling". Everyone on both sides seems to either be a 14-22 year or the ~30 year olds that they're following. The only thing the 30 year olds seem to be good at is being professionally unemployed. "FreeBSD Girl" hasn't made a commit in 5 years, but still leverages her "I'M A PRECIOUS DEVELOPER".

      I think what a lot of them are finding out is everyone has a ceiling in life. I made it until 30 until I hit mine. I've accepted that I will never be CEO or VP of my company because of the career paths I chose in my 20s. I have female friends from college hitting it just past 30 and they're blaming it on everything but the fact that they can't go any higher.

      Personally I think half of the problem is that a lot of kids weren't raised with reality in mind. They got into what ever college and major and life they wanted and they're expecting jobs without being able to actually perform. Brianna Wu's game Revolution 60 looks like something a 13 year old would have designed in the late 90s. There are a lot of actual women in STEM that have real accomplishments to their name by their ages. Stuff like patents.

      </soapbox>

  6. good, please stay there! by NostalgiaForInfinity · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope Twitter will be around for a long time. It's a honey pot for people who think they can engage in social or political commentary in 140 characters or less. The more these people are distracted and kept away from the rest of the Internet, the better.

  7. Re:Targeted users by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Adam Baldwin had his...

    I love origin stories.

    Even Richard Dawkin...

    You know you're in for a bumpy ride when a sentence starts out like that. And in case anyone doesn't know who Richard Dawkin is, he's mainly famous for getting BOFA'd from space on twitter. Here is the exchange that made him so well-known (the dank memes that follow the actual event are worth the trip):

    https://twitter.com/richarddaw...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  8. Re:Targeted users by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Dawkins (note the s) is famous for writing several very popular, widely translated books on atheism and the delusion of religion. He is also an accomplished evolutionary biologist.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  9. Re:Central Tenet by fredgiblet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yep. It's perfectly fine to harass and doxx people who disagree with you, but only if you're part of the hugbox.