4 ms·

For those out of the loop, 4chan started posting mocked Tweets from Leslie Jones saying all sorts of racist and homophobic things. Someone sent them to @nero,

For those out of the loop, 4chan started posting mocked Tweets from Leslie Jones saying all sorts of racist and homophobic things. Someone sent them to @nero, and he retweeted a few of them. This caused a lot conservatives and gay people on Twitter to get angry at Leslie Jones. Twitter then banned @nero for the fourth time this year. What's funny is that Leslie has actually posted racist things before and hasn't been banned for it. http://i.imgur.com/EawuVV2.png http://i.imgur.com/EawuVV2.png

danso 10y ago
Why would she be banned for posting "racist things"? That's not against Twitter's content policy: > Hateful conduct: You may not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease. We also do not allow accounts whose primary purpose is inciting harm towards others on the basis of these categories. https://support.twitter.com/articles/18311 https://support.twitter.com/articles/18311
- nailer 10y ago
  Did you miss: > directly attack other people on the basis of race ?
  - danso 10y ago
    Did you miss: > directly attack other people ? You think Twitter Legal looked this over and thought "We like the ban against attacking other people based on race but let's throw in an adjective...like, directly, to spice up that sentence" People have been free to spout on Twitter, including what they thought about breakfast or about what they think about the world including racial politics and theories. There's a difference between saying what's on your mind -- e.g. "Fuck Asia" -- and attacking someone because of their race, e.g. "Someone ought to kick your ass for being Asian"
    - nailer 10y ago
      Ah you read that as direct the attack at an individual, I read it as a direct attack on other people. The person in question didn't say the equivalent of 'duck Asia'. They said the the equivalent of 'fuck Asians'. You're probably aware of this.
      - danso 10y ago
        It's the attack on individuals -- users, typically -- that makes all the difference. Am I unhappy that the KKK is still an active organization? Sure, in theory, but in practice I'm OK if they follow the same laws I do and don't shove their beliefs down my throat. However, when a KKK member sends out mailers to the community saying, "Dan and his kind do not belong here; remind him of that by going to where he lives and works (addresses below)" -- that's still free speech, but the line between free speech and harassment is not brightly delimited. The practical matter of it is, it's much easier for someone to allege personal damages and harm when there that someone is personally targeted. Yes, that's a tautology, but one that has real world impact on the kinds of complaints that rise to public notice.
  - ryanbrunner 10y ago
    That's not the same as "posting racist things". None of the example tweets directly attacked an individual on the basis of race.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - StavrosK 10y ago
      Are you saying that "black people are lazy and barely people" isn't racist, for example? It doesn't directly attack an individual on the basis of race. Saying "white people smh" is as racist as "black people smh" is.
pluma 10y ago
Sadly this is all the information I can ever find on what went down. Are there any archives of what he actually said? All the screencaps I saw in articles on his ban are from other people harassing Leslie Jones -- which is obviously bad but obviously not the direct cause for his ban. I heard he incited the harassment and I presume that refers to those fake tweets from 4chan. Did anyone save a copy of them?

danso 10y ago

Why would she be banned for posting "racist things"? That's not against Twitter's content policy: > Hateful conduct: You may not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease. We also do not allow accounts whose primary purpose is inciting harm towards others on the basis of these categories. https://support.twitter.com/articles/18311 https://support.twitter.com/articles/18311

nailer 10y ago
Did you miss: > directly attack other people on the basis of race ?
- danso 10y ago
  Did you miss: > directly attack other people ? You think Twitter Legal looked this over and thought "We like the ban against attacking other people based on race but let's throw in an adjective...like, directly, to spice up that sentence" People have been free to spout on Twitter, including what they thought about breakfast or about what they think about the world including racial politics and theories. There's a difference between saying what's on your mind -- e.g. "Fuck Asia" -- and attacking someone because of their race, e.g. "Someone ought to kick your ass for being Asian"
  - nailer 10y ago
    Ah you read that as direct the attack at an individual, I read it as a direct attack on other people. The person in question didn't say the equivalent of 'duck Asia'. They said the the equivalent of 'fuck Asians'. You're probably aware of this.
    - danso 10y ago
      It's the attack on individuals -- users, typically -- that makes all the difference. Am I unhappy that the KKK is still an active organization? Sure, in theory, but in practice I'm OK if they follow the same laws I do and don't shove their beliefs down my throat. However, when a KKK member sends out mailers to the community saying, "Dan and his kind do not belong here; remind him of that by going to where he lives and works (addresses below)" -- that's still free speech, but the line between free speech and harassment is not brightly delimited. The practical matter of it is, it's much easier for someone to allege personal damages and harm when there that someone is personally targeted. Yes, that's a tautology, but one that has real world impact on the kinds of complaints that rise to public notice.
- ryanbrunner 10y ago
  That's not the same as "posting racist things". None of the example tweets directly attacked an individual on the basis of race.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - StavrosK 10y ago
    Are you saying that "black people are lazy and barely people" isn't racist, for example? It doesn't directly attack an individual on the basis of race. Saying "white people smh" is as racist as "black people smh" is.

pluma 10y ago

Sadly this is all the information I can ever find on what went down. Are there any archives of what he actually said? All the screencaps I saw in articles on his ban are from other people harassing Leslie Jones -- which is obviously bad but obviously not the direct cause for his ban. I heard he incited the harassment and I presume that refers to those fake tweets from 4chan. Did anyone save a copy of them?