4 ms·
Comparing abuse on Twitter and other platforms is like comparing Mt. Everest with Twin Peaks. On Facebook and most other social networks, at least the subject
by linkregister 10y ago
Comparing abuse on Twitter and other platforms is like comparing Mt. Everest with Twin Peaks.
On Facebook and most other social networks, at least the subject of harassment can at least block the perpetrator, and refuse to friend an alt account. Since the primary use case for Twitter is to have public tweets and open replies/mentions, blocking a user making death threats won't solve the problem; they will just open a new account and flame you from there. On Youtube, there is less reason to look at the comments; a celebrity can focus on the number of views as a metric for success.
The reach of abusers on Twitter is far greater than on other networks. Add to that a lack of defined communities, as in Reddit, Facebook Groups, and other message boards: there are no community moderators on Twitter to react to harassment and the posting of personal information.
I see the handling of abuse on Twitter as a hard problem that will take a mix of pattern-matching algorithms for brigade detection, machine learning on tweet sentiment and content (doxxing, death threats, other TOS violations), and least scaleably, a large pool of tier 1 support staff to act on recommendations to ban users.
- LordHumungous 10y agoIt's baffling that they don't require email, or better yet, phone verification before allowing you to tweet. That one simple change would make it a lot harder to spin up alts. On second thought, it's not baffling. I'm sure they're worried it would hurt their user growth numbers.
- thesimpsons1022 10y agothey'd probably lose 80 pct of their "user accounts". which they use as a nice inflated metric.
- linkregister 10y agoI'm sure their only meaningful metrics for acquisition is ad impression growth, revenue growth, and cost control. Active users is headline-grabbing but unless it translates to revenue, it's secondary.