Slashdot Mirror


After Calls For an Edit Button, Twitter Says it is Considering a 'Clarification' Feature (mashable.com)

Despite years-long calls from power users for an "edit" button, Twitter is considering how it could enable 'clarifications' of tweets, CEO Jack Dorsey said Thursday at Goldman Sachs' tech conference in San Francisco. From a report: "One of the concepts we're thinking about is clarifications," Dorsey said, saying that it could function similarly to a quote tweet. "Kind of like retweet with comment.. to add some context and some color on what they might have tweeted, or what they might have meant."

People already often use the quote tweet option for this kind of thing, but the two tweets may not always have the same reach, Dorsey noted. But if the person had opted to "clarify" that tweet, then the original tweet could always appear with the subsequent clarification. Dorsey cautioned that the feature is still just something the company is thinking about, not necessarily something that would launch. But he said such a feature could help people feel more comfortable with Twitter.

71 comments

  1. covfefe by Cedric+Tsui · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think anybody would want to be able to edit an old tweet.

    1. Re:covfefe by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      They are plenty of times, where I have wrote something where someone irreverently got insulted, due to the fact the tone of my message, wasn't properly convayed.
      Granted I try to reread, and rephrase my messages.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    2. Re: covfefe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh boy slow news day?
      Yes Dorsey has basement fanbois that hang on his every word and count the days until the next announcement and what will they learn about twitter and what will he say but they are mostly useless and would probably appear like the worst slackers unless Dorsey got kidnapped or something and then god help whoever has to deal with the shuffling masses blinking in the bright sunlight fumbling around for Dorsey and his kidnappers hiding place

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

      Not even for juicy hamberders?

    4. Re: covfefe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even if they put all the cheese in Wisconsin on it

    5. Re:covfefe by Zocalo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, who'd want to do that?

      Sarcasm aside, I think Twitter's proposal is the right one here given the way shitstorms have been kicked off by social media posts. Yes, you should be able to "correct the record" for honest errors, etc., but equally people need to be able to see the original unedited post where it's already triggered responses and the correction might alter the tone of those responses. Being able to say one thing, provoke a response, then subtly edit the original to make the initial repliers look like jerks is definitely not the way to go - you might as well roll out the red carpet and put a mat at the end with "Trolls Welcome" on it. I dare say someone could leverage it into a libel suit under the right circumstances as well (whether they'd prevail or not is another matter entirely).

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    6. Re:covfefe by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      Not covfefe, I meant to type crvfeefe. Damned autocorrect !

      --
      Nullius in verba
    7. Re:covfefe by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      or remove arbitrary size limits and give people enough room to actually explain in depth what they wanted to say.

      --
      bickerdyke
    8. Re:covfefe by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      I've been wanting Slashdot to do that for ages, but until recently you couldn't even reply to a message you just posted for five minutes, let alone place a clarification (or edit or delete it.)

      I'm not as married to the idea that people shouldn't be able to edit their comments as others are, as long as something about the comment shows its been edited there shouldn't be an issue. But clarifications is a decent compromise between people like me who see the value in being able to withdraw stuff that communicates the wrong thing, and people who believe everyone should be punished for typing too quickly and not passing their comments by a proof reader and a (human) editor before posting them.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    9. Re:covfefe by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      or remove arbitrary size limits and give people enough room to actually explain in depth what they wanted to say.

      Then it would no longer be Twitter. It would be Facebook.

      If you go to Facebook, you can see how well the absence of arbitrary limits leads to deep and thoughtful discussion.

    10. Re:covfefe by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Amending a comment (once) is cool. Editing is not. It's far too easy to abuse. People just have to learn self control.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    11. Re:covfefe by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      With THAT argument you can discredit any improvement.

      Like, if Coke hadn't that much sugar it wouldn't be Coke.

      And still, people buy Coke zero because they think it's better without sugar!

      --
      bickerdyke
    12. Re:covfefe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There should also be a mandatory retweet rule. I.e. If you retweet something that is later "clarified" or "corrected" then you should automatically retweet the clarified or corrected story.

    13. Re:covfefe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "have written" and "conveyed" are just a couple of edits that could be made using an edit buton.

    14. Re:covfefe by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Amending a comment (once) is cool. Editing is not. It's far too easy to abuse. People just have to learn self control.

      I like the way this part of Slashdot works now, but if it had to change, having the option to add a well-marked (and timestamped) postscript to one's comment would be a reasonable change. Ideally, child comments would also be marked somehow (color?) to denote whether they were left before or after the edit.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    15. Re:covfefe by Shotgun · · Score: 0

      Unless they were slinging antisemitic slurs.

      Well, I guess not. Nancy will always be willing to give a them a pass for that, won't she.

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
  2. So is Jusse Smollett by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He'd like to "clarify" that fake hate crime he staged.

    Bet he gets written off Empire now.

  3. People Want to be Insulted by sycodon · · Score: 0, Troll

    I put my Fake Facebook account on Twitter last night and posted some simple, factual, declarative statements in response to some of AOC's posts.

    Of course many people took the bait and lost their shit almost immediately.

    Great fun.

    People will be insulted regardless of your tone. They are just looking for an excuse.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:People Want to be Insulted by Napoleon++BONERpart · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's great, isn't it?

      This "clarification feature" sounds awfully suspect, a lot like the Snopes "apologist feature."

    2. Re: People Want to be Insulted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is twatter?

    3. Re: People Want to be Insulted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that I have used and abused the front of your body, let me now unceremoniously flip you over (your outraged shrieking gives me a woody) and abuse the other side.
      At least I believe that is what corporate America is thinking

    4. Re: People Want to be Insulted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the boys around the neighborhood call your mom.

    5. Re:People Want to be Insulted by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Something I have learned over time, it is generally a bad idea to try to bate people to get angry at you, or worse a false persona of you. A sarcastic comment, could lead to some guy actually taking you seriously.

      Where do you think these flat earthers came from? Probably from some guy trying to use sarcasm to explain the flaw, in some Anti-Science policy that is popular at the time, so they made the most crazy statement they could think of "The earth is flat" and fill it with flawed logic. There will be someone who doesn't pick it up, and followed it. Just because someone is an idiot, it doesn't mean they are not influential.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    6. Re:People Want to be Insulted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to bate people

      That's bait

    7. Re:People Want to be Insulted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is generally a bad idea to try to bate people

      Well, not in public, you probably should get a room.

      And we shouldn't go around trying appease idiots. If they can't control themselves, the best thing to do is to isolate them.

    8. Re:People Want to be Insulted by nwaack · · Score: 1

      Maybe, but there's a big difference between trying to bate someone so you can get some laughs, and actually calling someone out for being an idiot and spreading lies or fake news. The latter should be done whenever possible to keep that stuff to a minimum.

  4. Jack Dorsey is not in control by sinij · · Score: 1

    Why even bring Jack Dorsey up? It is very clear that he is not in control and just a figurehead at this point.

  5. I don't like it by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    Where will the 'smocking guns', 'covfefe' and the 'muderers' come from in the future?
    Twitter has 'the best words' as we know.

  6. Namefags are dumb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People getting insulted over the internet has one easy and permanent solution: Dont' be a namefag on the internet.
    Internet is for anonymous.

  7. I wonder where he got that idea! by eibhear · · Score: 1

    My proposal from August 2018, developing on an idea from February 2016.
    I don't suppose that they got the idea from me, but it surprises me that it has taken this long to consider doing it this way.

    1. Re:I wonder where he got that idea! by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Maybe they got the whole idea from slashdot. There are lots of things wrong with this site (I can't even submit a journal entry and/or story submission any more... WTF) but the one thing it really has correct is the preview-no-edit paradigm. No one should be allowed to edit anything without it being made very clear that it has been edited, AND HOW. Barring immediately obvious edit history, no one should get to edit. You want that, you run your own site. Even on my own site, I only tend to fix spelling or formatting errors, and I leave comments to note factual errors.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  8. Twitter edit button is a stupid idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1. Post a tweet that will elicit certain reactions.
    2. Wait for those certain reactions to pour in.
    3. Edit original tweet to make reactions look evil/racist/ignorant/etc.

    1. Re:Twitter edit button is a stupid idea by Hillie · · Score: 1

      Solution:

      Be like everyone else and allow people to click "edits" and see all versions of the tweet.

      --
      - Alex
    2. Re:Twitter edit button is a stupid idea by Cederic · · Score: 1

      3. Edit original tweet to make reactions look evil/racist/ignorant/etc.

      I'm struggling here to think of a reply that might look racist following an edit to the post to which it responded, that didn't look racist anyway.

    3. Re:Twitter edit button is a stupid idea by Tyrannosaur · · Score: 1

      Everyone else? The only place I know of where you can see the entire history of a post is stackexchange. It's a great idea, but definitely not mainstream

    4. Re: Twitter edit button is a stupid idea by David+Gould · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the right balance seems to be: allow editing, but keep edit history; display only latest version, but with an "(edited at )" label that links to the history; no hotlinking to old versions, but they're available.

      --
      David Gould
      main(i){putchar(340056100>>(i-1)*5&31|!!(i<6)<< 6)&&main(++i);}
    5. Re:Twitter edit button is a stupid idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really?

      Any vague responce expressing an emption can be manipulated this way. It's especially easy with "stock" phrases that people to use as jokes and such.

      before:
      "I just found a huge snake in my toilet! It'm terrified of snakes!"
      "whelp time to move to a new house"

      after:
      "A black lesbian couple just moved in next door"
      "whelp time to move to a new house"

    6. Re:Twitter edit button is a stupid idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      uh, wikipedia...?

  9. You already can correct the record. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You make another post/response literally correcting the record.

  10. How many times can you "Clarify"? by mykepredko · · Score: 3, Funny

    I can see something like this happening:
    Original Tweet: "Contrary to what's being reported by the lying MSM, I did not have relations or even spend time with that woman."
    Clarification 1: "After reflection and prayer with my wife and my pastor, I realize that the interactions I had with that woman were inappropriate."
    Clarification 2: "I have consulted with my attorney and I can confidently say that at no time during our time together did I have any reason to think that woman was a member of the Russian government."
    Clarification 3: "I realize that the police report says otherwise, but because I met the woman in the hotel bar, I naturally assumed that she was over 18."
    Clarification 4: "To be completely honest, the skimpy dress lead me to originally believe the person that I spent time with in my hotel room was a woman."

    1. Re: How many times can you "Clarify"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clarification #33: I did not realize I would be unable to complete instructions for the border wall from ADX Florence. I merely assumed from the documentary I read that inmates were generally free to keep their fobs and use the whitehouse intranet

    2. Re:How many times can you "Clarify"? by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

      If only Bill Clinton had had twitter.....

      --
      bickerdyke
    3. Re:How many times can you "Clarify"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His gaffs were in uneditable public record as testimony. Close enough.

    4. Re:How many times can you "Clarify"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or just call the button "memory hole" and be done with it.

  11. Boycott Trump's Propaganda Outlet by BrendaEM · · Score: 1, Interesting

    We never needed twitter.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/c/BrendaEM
    1. Re:Boycott Trump's Propaganda Outlet by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2

      LOL you mean the way the US President bypasses the media and speaks directly without editing? That's the greatest thing to happen to democracy since the printing press.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Boycott Trump's Propaganda Outlet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WITCH HUNT!

  12. First post! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeay

  13. Just do it like a wiki by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Let a user edit once, for five minutes.

    Indicate the tweet was edited, with a link to see a diff.

    Then you get the benefit of people being able to edit typos, with still the fiery aspect of the full hot take for all to see.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Just do it like a wiki by thevirtualcat · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points for this.

      The "clarification" idea is a good idea, but it also misses the point. People want to be able to fix typos without manually copying, deleting, recreating, pasting, and editing the tweet. Hell, the "edit" button could just be a shorthand for deleting and recreating the tweet. Fixing typos on twitter is far more annoying than it needs to be. (Which is why a lot of people don't bother fixing them.)

    2. Re:Just do it like a wiki by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let a user edit once, for five minutes.

      Indicate the tweet was edited, with a link to see a diff.

      Then you get the benefit of people being able to edit typos, with still the fiery aspect of the full hot take for all to see.

      Do it like wikipedia.
      Let any user edit, and have it always revert to an editor's favorite version.

  14. I'll ask a stupid question... by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    ...why does anyone use this SHITTY platform?
    It doesn't have any real modern functionality, it doesn't understand emotes, emojis, or even standard markup languages, it's like it was written in the fucking dark ages.

    I mean seriously, really all it is is a mechanism for blurting ones' random thoughts to a bunch of people that either a) don't really give a shit, or b) give WAY TOO MUCH of a shit about what you're saying.

    I mean, with slashdot comments, you at least have to go to a WEBSITE to do that.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:I'll ask a stupid question... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      ...why does anyone use this SHITTY platform? [...] all it is is a mechanism for blurting ones' random thoughts to a bunch of people that either a) don't really give a shit, or b) give WAY TOO MUCH of a shit about what you're saying.

      Welcome to the internet, you must be new here.

      Alternately: Who gives a shit?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. What is do damnt difficult, ..? by ReneR · · Score: 1

    To allow editing for a minute or two. Just when you posted an auto-correct typo, or wrong link (e.g. your own YT video, to /edit and not /watch) things like this. I agree long term editing is a bit unfair, but a minute or two like some websites already do, ..?!

    1. Re:What is do damnt difficult, ..? by Hillie · · Score: 1

      Long term editing.

      There's no excuse as I've mentioned elsewhere.. Facebook lets you edit things eternally, and shows an "edited" link that brings up a changelog.

      --
      - Alex
  16. Twitter Sucks!!! by backslashdot · · Score: 1

    Twitter Sucks!!!

    * To clarify, I didn't mean everyone on twitter. Obviously.
    ** Update: I wasn't referring to any specific individuals or twitter workers. I meant that twitter as the service is currently provided has non-salient aspects but not due to any specific persons.
    *** Note: I was talking about Twitter brand Vaccuum cleaners which are sold in Morocco.
    **** OK I lied.

  17. Luck 'em naggers! Luck 'em all! by Dirk+Becher · · Score: 0

    Phew, that was close!

  18. Prufe yuo dont nead it by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    Imagin what wud happin if Slahsdot let us fix are typos.

  19. Two words: Auto correct by Hillie · · Score: 2

    I find that 90% of the errors in my tweets are auto-correct related. It does the most insane blunders, and also butchers their/there/they're to/too are/our etc. Pretty much any word that sounds the same it will make you look like an illiterate fool who triggers grammar nazis on the daily.

    You don't always have time to proofread tweets two or three times just to make sure you don't miss some stupid auto-correct blunder.

    And now-- if it's not bad enough desktop OS's have auto-correct built into them as well.

    --
    - Alex
  20. History button by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What people need is an edit button & a history button on any edited tweet so that they can see what changes were made. This also opens up some possibilities for humorous exchanges.

  21. Twits will tweet :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The juxtaposition of the terms "power user" and "twitter" made my eyes nearly roll out of my head.

    Twitter's architecture, combined with human nature, means it can never be more than a hate machine. Expecting anything else is like expecting a howitzer to write a sonata.

    Your IP was banned? Walk to the nearest McDonalds and get a new one, make a new hate megaphone. My daughter got multiple twitter death threats when she was thirteen and Twitter was completely unable to do anything about it.

    (BTW I solved that one by asking her if she'd rejected any advances from boys lately, and then making a visit to that boy's house and talking to his father.)

  22. Easy answer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is not for conversation. It is a quick way to broadcast a message in one shot to people who are actively interested in receiving messages from you on their phone using SMS. That is all.

    Do you have something to sell? By all means, use Twitter. Do you want to have a conversation? Then pick up the phone, dial their number and talk to that entity.

  23. Editing is fine by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Editing is not. It's far too easy to abuse.

    Editing cannot be abused if you can easily see history of the edit including the original text.

    The crystal clear goal of whatever Twitter does should be to make correcting simple typos as simple and easy as possible. That is the vast majority of why people really want editing. The Clarification feature fails this single simple test.

    Editing should not be erasure, but it's also not simply clarification in the large majority of cases.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Editing is fine by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Amending the comment serves the same purpose. It can be indented beneath the original. It's the only logical way to do it. It's not a problem.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:Editing is fine by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Do you fix all your typos by writing on the next line "oh that should have been a Y instead of an E"? Or do you correct the mis-typed letter?

      You are a fucking idiot.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    3. Re:Editing is fine by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Or do you correct the mis-typed letter?

      Yes, I do correct it, before I post it! Once it's sent, too damn bad, under the right conditions it can be amended. That's what you should live with. Kinda jumpy, aren't ya?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:Editing is fine by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      Everything's not about you, your majesty. I'm thinking of the vast majority of twitter users, while you seem curiously focused on only yourself.

      I'll let you have the last response since you seem to just be talking to yourself anyway.

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  24. Or how about just an edit button? by zenasprime · · Score: 1

    You know, to do the things that people do with edit buttons, like fix a typo. Does anyone really care about "clarifying" that "oops I spelled that wrong. I meant potato"?

    *sigh*

  25. Pastebin by tepples · · Score: 1

    Longer posts are what Pastebin, TwitLonger, GitHub Gist, and your own blog are made for. Post the whole thing elsewhere, and summarize to Twitter with a link.

  26. Abuse by pjw2072 · · Score: 1

    I think the obvious problem that would happen with something like this is that the original post is something benign that goes viral and then the "clarification" is something vulgar that potentially shows up in the unsuspecting user's profile that happened to like the tweet. This seems to solve one problem, but could open a big can of worms too.

  27. God forbid *POSTERS* can't take resposibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for their own shit.

    Instead of just firing off any stray thought that comes into your head, how about using the old standard 'count to 10' before foisting your sage words to the unwilling public?

    The social media generation have such short attention spans, I'm amazed that they find the time to type -- ikes -- 140 characters of message!

    I'm sure most people are just freaking out now because every little thing you post on social media will now be scrutinized more heavily that China's social credit system and only now do they really comprehend what they've done.

    Hmmm - let he who is without sin... sauce for the goose... what goes around, comes around... don't do nothin, won't be nothin...
    OOO! Dogpile on the Nazi!!!