> What are we even talking about here - "quashing abuse"? Well, even if we don't agree on the full definition, we could start somewhere, specifically at the bo

> What are we even talking about here - "quashing abuse"? Well, even if we don't agree on the full definition, we could start somewhere, specifically at the bottom of the barrel. Harassment is an easy one: Death threats, threats of violence, unwanted contact with people in real life, unprompted sexual comments, threats of doxxing / swatting / hacking, relentless insults, a combination thereof etc, aren't really difficult to agree on. I don't think there's a convincing or defensible argument that someone has a right to follow someone around and bother them /directly/. Just improving this would be a massive improvement in many twitter users' lives, and twitter has been condemned many times for failing to take the simplest actions to prevent this. Hateful ideologies discussed privately is quite different than that - I do think those still cause measurable harm and I'm against that personally, but at least I can understand why some people hold a free-speech slippery slope argument for not interfering.