Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Rolls Out Stricter Rules On Abusive Content (apnews.com)
Twitter has begun enforcing stricter policies on violent and abusive content like hateful images or symbols, including those attached to user profiles. From a report: The new guidelines, which were first announced one month ago, were put into place Monday. Monitors at the company will weigh hateful imagery in the same way they do graphic violence and adult content. If a user wants to post symbols or images that might be considered hateful, the post must be marked "sensitive media." Other users would then see a warning that would allow them to decide whether to view the post. Twitter is also prohibiting users from abusing or threatening others through their profiles or usernames. While the new guidelines became official on Monday, the social media company continues to work out internal monitoring tools and it is revamping the appeals process for banned or suspended accounts. But the company will also begin accepting reports from users.
Just call it what it is: Twitter is starting a purge of conservatives. The SJWs have been working on this for years and Twitter is finally caving.
It's hilarious to see how many of the major discussion or social media platforms raised a huge ruckus about the very recent "net neutrality" policy change in the US.
Yet despite these platforms demanding that "net neutrality" be applied to telecom infrastructure providers, we've seen them act the exact opposite when it comes to the data they control. They're very in favor of showing partiality toward certain political beliefs, for example. They have ever-expanding definitions of "abusive" content that often go far beyond any censorship they're forced to perform by governments or by law. We repeatedly see comments and submissions and users deleted/banned merely for expressing views that aren't far enough to the left.
True net neutrality isn't just at the packet level. True net neutrality applies at all layers, including the highest levels where content and user comments, rather than packets, are the main focus. It means not deleting/hiding comments or submissions, and not banning users, just because they express perfectly legal ideas that hurt somebody's feelings.
Anyone who limits net neutrality to telecom providers alone isn't supporting real net neutrality. They're supporting net partiality, and that's the furthest thing from real net neutrality.
Real net neutrality means that packets aren't judged by their content or source/destination, but net neutrality also means that comments don't get deleted/hidden/censored and users don't get banned just for engaging in perfectly reasonable and legal discussion that some thin-skinned mental weaklings on the political left dislike.
B-b-b-but DRUMPF!!!
I pity people like you who spend their whole lives crying about someone you don't even know.
Now it's Twitter's job to be a nanny to the snow flakes to keep them from melting?
The only problem is that they have history of enforcing rules against racists, crazies and trolls rather halfheartedly and the few times they've at least tried to enforce those rules properly those normally excluded racists, crazies and trolls have cried fowl.
In all seriousness twitter has never really been a place where any even slightly valuable dialogue takes place. 140 characters and a massive potential audience is great for chanting slogans, both political and advertisement ones, mindless drivel and abuse (there's dozens of people who have regularly do what Milo Yiannopolis got banned for), but not much else. I don't think anything has caused as massive of a regression in public discourse as twitter has so the sooner they finally destroy their platform and run themselves into bankruptcy, which should have long since happened seeing how they've never come close to turning a profit, the better.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
Covfefe?
People who are 1-2 months of unemployment away from foreclosure proceedings...
...should have enough sense not to vote for people who'll push them into being 0.5-1 month of unemployment away from foreclosure proceedings?
Ezekiel 23:20
If Twitter were serious they would hit Donald Trump with a lifetime ban because he's not just an impulsive liar, his tweets are dangerous and hurtful. And allowing Fox News to amplify their disinformation campaign is a rotten way to do business.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
...should have enough sense not to vote for people who'll push them into being 0.5-1 month of unemployment away from foreclosure proceedings?
8 years under Obama is generally what got those people there in the first place. Their options are: More of the same, or a different path. Looks like the choice of "a different path" is working out much better for most people already.
Most of what the democrats are pulling right now is "more of the same" and people are tired of it. It's the same reason that the democrats are experiencing what's called "party flight" where the core becomes more moderate and looks at 3rd party alternatives, or they simply switch because they want to see them burn. The democrats delegates just finished electing a full-on anti-white race baiter to the leadership of the party, that's not going to help them win either the rustbelt or the heartland. It's also not just happening in the US, but Canada as well. There has been a shift from Liberals to both Green and NDP effectively fracturing the "left-wing vote" into 1/3's. ~20 years ago it was the Conservatives(PC) and Reform Party(smaller government, more resource exports, etc). Canada did very well under the CPC(party that replaced both of them under unification), regardless of what your views on Harper are, Canada was the only G8 and G20 country not to enter recession during the 2008 crash. And was the only country to gain net FT jobs over PT jobs during the recovery period.
Om, nomnomnom...