Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Will Start Hiding Tweets That 'Detract From the Conversation' (slate.com)

Yesterday, Twitter announced several new changes to quiet trolls and remove spam. According to Slate, the company "will begin hiding tweets from certain accounts in conversations and search results." In order to see them, you'll now have to scroll to the bottom of the conversation and click "Show more replies," or go into your search settings and choose "See everything." From the report: When Twitter's software decides that a certain user is "detract[ing] from the conversation," all of that user's tweets will be hidden from search results and public conversations until their reputation improves. And they won't know that they're being muted in this way; Twitter says it's still working on ways to notify people and help them get back into its good graces. In the meantime, their tweets will still be visible to their followers as usual and will still be able to be retweeted by others. They just won't show up in conversational threads or search results by default. The change will affect a very small fraction of users, explained Twitter's vice president of trust and safety, Del Harvey -- much less than 1 percent. Still, the company believes it could make a significant difference in the average user's experience. In early testing of the new feature, Twitter said it has seen a 4 percent drop in abuse reports in its search tool and an 8 percent drop in abuse reports in conversation threads.

2 of 186 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Translation by Required+Snark · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    Conservatives go batshit crazy when they think their political opposition are using tactics they claim for their own. In this rant it's suppression of free speech.

    Specifically, your use of the term "sjw" is a dog-whistle/code word for abusive and bullying behavior. You want to be able to demean people online based on gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity and/or political affiliation. You are conflating "free speech" with personal attacks, lies and mud slinging. Your intent is to deny online access to anyone you disagree with. You don't want free speech, you want hate speech.

    Do your opponents act in a similar fashion? They do to a small extent, but compared to the torrent of violent hate speech that spews from the right wing any thing else is inconsequential.

    You don't want free speech and you don't want democracy. You want a country that look like Putin's Russia. Instead of trying to wreck democracy here why don't you go to Putin's Russia. I'm sure you would fit right in.

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
  2. Re:Translation by Cederic · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    your use of the term "sjw" is a dog-whistle/code word for abusive and bullying behavior. You want to be able to demean people online based on gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity and/or political affiliation. You are conflating "free speech" with personal attacks, lies and mud slinging. Your intent is to deny online access to anyone you disagree with. You don't want free speech, you want hate speech.

    I don't know what the fuck you mean by 'dog whistle' and 'code word' is just incorrectly used.

    But in reply to someone using a lazy label to collectively identify a group of people you appear to have responded with personal attacks, lies and mud slinging.

    Sorry, I've lost track, who was it that wanted hated speech and who is just fucking giving it out?