I don’t much like the article that you’re using for your analogy, though. It seems full of stereotypes and biases that I would rather not mix up with an understanding of Twitter’s unwillingness to protect its users and uphold its TOS.

I don’t much like the article that you’re using for your analogy, though. It seems full of stereotypes and biases that I would rather not mix up with an understanding of Twitter’s unwillingness to protect its users and uphold its TOS.

“Biz Stone Official Rep, replied 1 hour ago
We’re upset that Ariel is having such a bad experience with Twitter. She’s been a long term user of ours and a great advocate of our service. Also, it’s clear that folks here are interested and concerned about how we at Twitter react to content issues like this.

Something to keep in mind is that we’re discussing content that has not been shared here. This account is no longer available for review because the person who created it willingly removed it back in March. We reviewed this account at the time of the complaint and did not find it in violation of our Terms.

The fact that so many of us can have differing opinions without having even reviewed the content we’re discussing highlights the difficulty of this issue. In fact, Twitter recognizes that it is not skilled at judging content disputes between individuals. Determining the line between update and insult is not something that Twitter nor a crowd would do well.

We have deleted accounts for more straightforward violations of the existing Terms. That being said, we are engaged in an editorial review of those Terms to make it more clear what actions we will and won’t take. Essentially, Twitter is a communication utility, not a mediator of content.

It’s great that everyone’s talking about this because it helps us make important decisions. After all, Twitter is a new medium that we’re all figuring out as we go.

I’m thankful
*The company and 7 other people say this solves the problem ”

This is me again, PC: Twitter keeps saying that they ‘don’t know’ what harassing is, that they can’t sit around and settle disputes between users. This may or may not be true, but it would behoove them to construct a semblance of propriety. In other words, they need to try. This lame excuse of ‘we can’t do it nor could we figure out what is abuse and what is commentary’ is crap. It wouldn’t stand up in court and it definitely isn’t being bought in the court of public opinion now.

“Biz Stone Official Rep, replied 1 hour ago
We’re upset that Ariel is having such a bad experience with Twitter. She’s been a long term user of ours and a great advocate of our service. Also, it’s clear that folks here are interested and concerned about how we at Twitter react to content issues like this.

Something to keep in mind is that we’re discussing content that has not been shared here. This account is no longer available for review because the person who created it willingly removed it back in March. We reviewed this account at the time of the complaint and did not find it in violation of our Terms.

The fact that so many of us can have differing opinions without having even reviewed the content we’re discussing highlights the difficulty of this issue. In fact, Twitter recognizes that it is not skilled at judging content disputes between individuals. Determining the line between update and insult is not something that Twitter nor a crowd would do well.

We have deleted accounts for more straightforward violations of the existing Terms. That being said, we are engaged in an editorial review of those Terms to make it more clear what actions we will and won’t take. Essentially, Twitter is a communication utility, not a mediator of content.

It’s great that everyone’s talking about this because it helps us make important decisions. After all, Twitter is a new medium that we’re all figuring out as we go.

I’m thankful
*The company and 7 other people say this solves the problem ”

This is me again, PC: Twitter keeps saying that they ‘don’t know’ what harassing is, that they can’t sit around and settle disputes between users. This may or may not be true, but it would behoove them to construct a semblance of propriety. In other words, they need to try. This lame excuse of ‘we can’t do it nor could we figure out what is abuse and what is commentary’ is crap. It wouldn’t stand up in court and it definitely isn’t being bought in the court of public opinion now.