Announcing the Twitter Trust & Safety Council
- Thread starter boag
- Start date
Recommended Videos
...I'm going to go full Rick Sanchez and say, oh look. Another bureaucratic system that'll get infiltrated and corrupted by either one ideology or another. They'll probably rail hardcore against anyone that doesn't share their ideological views. Who watches the watchmen and all that Jazz. Doesn't matter who or what, both sides share the same coin.
Well whatever. It's Twitter's money, they can do what they want with it. Judging from the groups chosen it shouldn't affect me one bit.
Well whatever. It's Twitter's money, they can do what they want with it. Judging from the groups chosen it shouldn't affect me one bit.
While I'm not going to spit on them for trying to make the internet a less shitty place, I don't really see how this is going to stop people being shitbags on Twitter.
Main reason the service is in the state it's in is because people don't often think too hard about what they are posting or how it might come off to other people.
That's why I never really got an account, I have no value for it and if I'm going to rag about political statements or current events, I'd rather use a format that makes my point clear then 140 characters I can type in while I'm taking a shit.
Main reason the service is in the state it's in is because people don't often think too hard about what they are posting or how it might come off to other people.
That's why I never really got an account, I have no value for it and if I'm going to rag about political statements or current events, I'd rather use a format that makes my point clear then 140 characters I can type in while I'm taking a shit.
I think Twitter definitely has a role to play in protecting the safety of vulnerable users who use their site, but there is a fine line between protecting the vulnerable and censoring people, and they've got to be careful how they walk that line.
They seem a bit vague about what they're actually doing when it comes to that post, so that is already a bit of a red flag to me.
They seem a bit vague about what they're actually doing when it comes to that post, so that is already a bit of a red flag to me.
Morty, the internet has gone bad Morty! Buuuurrrp! The leftist Morty, they've taken over Twitter!Fallow said:Ha, you are wrong on that account!SaneAmongInsane said:
...Because it has already happened
Yeah I saw the whole Milo losing his verification thing... but ya know, fuck it. I don't dig his style man, he's very undude.
Unless the Twitter Trust and Safety Council is prepared to destroy Twitter and salt the ashes, I doubt there is anything they can do to make it safe or trustworthy.
There's no line. Protecting the vulnerable is censoring people. Hell, if you delete a tweet that's doxing or threatening, it's still censorship.FileTrekker said:
That's the problem with the abuse of the word "censorship" online. Sure, it triggers the right people to wip up a frenzy, but it's functionally useless.
It already has been, by design. Note the utter lack of anyone connected with promoting free expression online in the council, while groups like the "dangerous speech project" are there.SaneAmongInsane said:
That's totally ignoring Feminist Frequency and their utter inability to distinguish between a "conversation" and a "monologue."
I just phrased it like that cause otherwise it comes across as "AARGGG! FEMINAZIS COMMIN' TO TAK OUR TWATTAH!" which isn't what I'm about, though I do despise the idea of any council on principal. (Also far left/far right ideologies may as well be the same thing, they're that frightening.)Schadrach said:
This idea of free expression on the internet is a myth though. Twitter is not a tool of free expression. Twitter is a company trying to EARN $$$ Brah! They pay the bills to run the place, they can decide who can say what. It's their world, and I'm 100% okay with that. If I truly want free expression, I got a podcast man. That I pay out of pocket for. There it is.
Eh, as I understand it, Twitter has long promised to protect vulnerable users, without actually doing much in practice.
I think the basic idea of it is fine.
Nothing wrong with having moderation for online services and nothing wrong with involving prominent users to advice on said moderation which seems to be what's going on here.
We'll have to see how it works out in practice.
Nothing wrong with having moderation for online services and nothing wrong with involving prominent users to advice on said moderation which seems to be what's going on here.
We'll have to see how it works out in practice.
Now, read the Twitter announcement regarding the council and note that they talk about "free expression" and people "expressing themselves freely."DudeistBelieve said:
It's one thing not to be a tool of free expression. It's another to talk up how you are while increasing the degree to which you aren't.
Best case scenario? The state of Twitter improves slightly. Let's face it, no matter how Orwellian a moniker you hang on them, these people will hardly be able to change the kind of (non)discourse on Twitter. Most likely scenario? Status quo. "Worst" case scenario? Twitter gives them truly Orwellian powers and prompts a mass migration from Twitter. Someone else will come to pick up the slack and take Twitter's throne. It happened to Digg, it happened to MySpace and it can happen to Twitter if they decide that truly inane levels of censorship is called for. Now I am not trying to say promoting "be civilized adults and behave as such" is a bad idea. I am saying that if "thoughtcrimes" are punished, where people are banned or censured for having dissenting or "unenlightened" views, then chances are Twitter will crash and burn regardless of how big they are now. That's the kind of power that's needed to truly fulfill what the council ostensibly are supposed to do in its entirety and its a power that is very likely to be abused.