7 ms·

Is this the same Twitter that has allegedly shadowbanned Scott Adams multiple times for his political positions? If Twitter is interested in transparency, how

Is this the same Twitter that has allegedly shadowbanned Scott Adams multiple times for his political positions? If Twitter is interested in transparency, how about some transparency on that? Twitter's actions make me distrust any "transparency" talk, even if I disagree with Adams on certain things.

ng12 10y ago
It's just virtue signaling, something Jack is very big on.
- WillyOnWheels 10y ago
  Virtue signaling is a meaningless phrase.
  - Karunamon 10y ago
    ..seeing something like this come from someone with the name of an infamous Wikipedia troll is just a little bit giggle worthy. That said, no it isn't. the action or practice of publicly expressing opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue. In other words, it's a way to proclaim "I am a good person!" to the world, usually in a vacuous or shallow way.
    - WillyOnWheels 10y ago
      The phrase 'virtue signaling' is always meant to convey "public expressing opinions intended to demonstrate one's good character, in a vacuous or shallow way". There's no "usually" about it. My comment was commenting on someone who wrote (doing a little interpolating here) "It's just Jack(in his role as CEO of twitter) is just virtue signaling, who was commenting on whether Twitter is or is not Twitter is 'shadowbanning' Scott Adams. It's a nonsense argument, Twitter doesn't shadowban, the commenter is probably also commenting on Jack's very public positions on equality and justice. His public statements are heard by millions. I'm sure he actually means what he says. It's not vacuous or shallow.
vkou 10y ago
Is this the same Scott Adams that claims to have been shadowbanned, without any proof? Might his lower Twitter engagement have something to do with people getting sick of hearing from him about Trump?
- teddyh 10y ago
  How would anyone actually prove something like this, short of getting Twitter to admit it? What he has seen is: > my tweets only go out to a subset of my followers. The rest don’t know I tweeted. My followers tell me this is the case. They have to visit my timeline to see my tweets. What other proof could anyone realistically provide?
  - phpnode 10y ago
    That is how twitter works - it doesn't show every tweet from everyone you follow in your timeline, it shows a subset based on what it considers most relevant.
    - djsumdog 10y ago
      It's a bigger problem in general with both Twitter/FB and how they filter the order content is displayed (sometimes called "the filter bubble") in order to drive up engagement and revenue. The average person doesn't care about federated social networks and the average dev or admin doesn't have the time outside of work to setup and maintain one for his or herself.
    - Thlom 10y ago
      That's why I almost never use the Twitter web site or their app. Too confusing. I stick with Tweetbot which still only shows the complete timeline in reversed chronological order.
      - sperglord 10y ago
        I was not aware the app did that. I'm a little disappointed in the service to learn about this.
kibwen 10y ago
Care to cite a source? And what sort of transparency, exactly, do you want to see out of Twitter to disprove something that cannot be disproven?
- MichaelBurge 10y ago
  If Twitter outright stated "We did not shadowban Scott Adams or otherwise place any restrictions on him, and do not intend to do so in the future", that would be sufficient for me. Usually corporations and people don't outright lie.
  - vkou 10y ago
    Do they also need to assure you that their board of directors is not composed of reptilians? Do they need to respond to every accusation and conspiracy theory, or just the ones without supporting evidence?
    - MichaelBurge 10y ago
      It seems like they'd owe it to their investors to at least comment on the ones that make it into news articles, and appear to be worrying a small percentage of their userbase. Keep in mind, they have a Privacy Policy, a Terms of Service, and dozens of pages on their support site that cover all sorts of issues in great detail. Surely it's at least worth a sentence in their ToS and a tweet from a middle-manager, even if the accusations are completely bogus? Personally, I put the probability at around 30%, so I think it's more likely to be false than true.
Fauntleroy 10y ago
If that's the case I'm surprised Adams hasn't packed up and taken his business to a competitor like gab.ai
- teddyh 10y ago
  He actually adresses this point: > Realistically, can I quit Twitter and be a successful media personality without it? Not in today’s world. The only way I could make that work is by having a huge presence on Facebook or Instagram.
herval 10y ago
Do you have any source to confirm that "shadowbanning" even exists?
- pbarnes_1 10y ago
  It doesn't.
  - Domenic_S 10y ago
    "HN user pbarnes_1 with no bio" doesn't qualify as a source.
mulmen 10y ago
Twitter has no obligation to show anything anyone enters into their platform. They own it, they can do what they want with it. The government is subject to the rule of law and these NSLs can easily run afoul of the laws put in place to protect us from our government.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  I know nothing of this case, nor do I care about SA. Additionally, I believe that all NSL's should be illegal, precisely for the reasons you specify above. While twitter is not legally obligated to show anything, I am not legally obligated to like them. They are still open to criticism.
leephillips 10y ago
Or not... https://lee-phillips.org/tsb009009009/ https://lee-phillips.org/tsb009009009/
WillyOnWheels 10y ago
Twitter doesn't shadowban, multiple current and ex Twitter employees can confirm for you.
hellbanner 10y ago
Twitter let Arab Spring happen. Think about that.. what was their political motivation?
- throwaway91111 10y ago
  It doesn't take much to let something happen when the correct course is to do nothing.
  - hellbanner 10y ago
    No nation exists in a vacuum.
dashundchen 10y ago
The same Scott Adams who sockpuppets on message boards and reddit, to agree with himself and call himself a genius? Yeah I'd take the shadowban claims with a grain of salt. http://comicsalliance.com/scott-adams-plannedchaos-sockpuppet/ http://comicsalliance.com/scott-adams-plannedchaos-sockpuppe...

ng12 10y ago

It's just virtue signaling, something Jack is very big on.

WillyOnWheels 10y ago
Virtue signaling is a meaningless phrase.
- Karunamon 10y ago
  ..seeing something like this come from someone with the name of an infamous Wikipedia troll is just a little bit giggle worthy. That said, no it isn't. the action or practice of publicly expressing opinions or sentiments intended to demonstrate one's good character or the moral correctness of one's position on a particular issue. In other words, it's a way to proclaim "I am a good person!" to the world, usually in a vacuous or shallow way.
  - WillyOnWheels 10y ago
    The phrase 'virtue signaling' is always meant to convey "public expressing opinions intended to demonstrate one's good character, in a vacuous or shallow way". There's no "usually" about it. My comment was commenting on someone who wrote (doing a little interpolating here) "It's just Jack(in his role as CEO of twitter) is just virtue signaling, who was commenting on whether Twitter is or is not Twitter is 'shadowbanning' Scott Adams. It's a nonsense argument, Twitter doesn't shadowban, the commenter is probably also commenting on Jack's very public positions on equality and justice. His public statements are heard by millions. I'm sure he actually means what he says. It's not vacuous or shallow.

vkou 10y ago

Is this the same Scott Adams that claims to have been shadowbanned, without any proof? Might his lower Twitter engagement have something to do with people getting sick of hearing from him about Trump?

teddyh 10y ago
How would anyone actually prove something like this, short of getting Twitter to admit it? What he has seen is: > my tweets only go out to a subset of my followers. The rest don’t know I tweeted. My followers tell me this is the case. They have to visit my timeline to see my tweets. What other proof could anyone realistically provide?
- phpnode 10y ago
  That is how twitter works - it doesn't show every tweet from everyone you follow in your timeline, it shows a subset based on what it considers most relevant.
  - djsumdog 10y ago
    It's a bigger problem in general with both Twitter/FB and how they filter the order content is displayed (sometimes called "the filter bubble") in order to drive up engagement and revenue. The average person doesn't care about federated social networks and the average dev or admin doesn't have the time outside of work to setup and maintain one for his or herself.
  - Thlom 10y ago
    That's why I almost never use the Twitter web site or their app. Too confusing. I stick with Tweetbot which still only shows the complete timeline in reversed chronological order.
    - sperglord 10y ago
      I was not aware the app did that. I'm a little disappointed in the service to learn about this.

kibwen 10y ago

Care to cite a source? And what sort of transparency, exactly, do you want to see out of Twitter to disprove something that cannot be disproven?

MichaelBurge 10y ago
If Twitter outright stated "We did not shadowban Scott Adams or otherwise place any restrictions on him, and do not intend to do so in the future", that would be sufficient for me. Usually corporations and people don't outright lie.
- vkou 10y ago
  Do they also need to assure you that their board of directors is not composed of reptilians? Do they need to respond to every accusation and conspiracy theory, or just the ones without supporting evidence?
  - MichaelBurge 10y ago
    It seems like they'd owe it to their investors to at least comment on the ones that make it into news articles, and appear to be worrying a small percentage of their userbase. Keep in mind, they have a Privacy Policy, a Terms of Service, and dozens of pages on their support site that cover all sorts of issues in great detail. Surely it's at least worth a sentence in their ToS and a tweet from a middle-manager, even if the accusations are completely bogus? Personally, I put the probability at around 30%, so I think it's more likely to be false than true.

Fauntleroy 10y ago

If that's the case I'm surprised Adams hasn't packed up and taken his business to a competitor like gab.ai

teddyh 10y ago
He actually adresses this point: > Realistically, can I quit Twitter and be a successful media personality without it? Not in today’s world. The only way I could make that work is by having a huge presence on Facebook or Instagram.

herval 10y ago

Do you have any source to confirm that "shadowbanning" even exists?

pbarnes_1 10y ago
It doesn't.
- Domenic_S 10y ago
  "HN user pbarnes_1 with no bio" doesn't qualify as a source.

mulmen 10y ago

Twitter has no obligation to show anything anyone enters into their platform. They own it, they can do what they want with it. The government is subject to the rule of law and these NSLs can easily run afoul of the laws put in place to protect us from our government.

CaptSpify 10y ago
I know nothing of this case, nor do I care about SA. Additionally, I believe that all NSL's should be illegal, precisely for the reasons you specify above. While twitter is not legally obligated to show anything, I am not legally obligated to like them. They are still open to criticism.

leephillips 10y ago

Or not... https://lee-phillips.org/tsb009009009/ https://lee-phillips.org/tsb009009009/

WillyOnWheels 10y ago

Twitter doesn't shadowban, multiple current and ex Twitter employees can confirm for you.

hellbanner 10y ago

Twitter let Arab Spring happen. Think about that.. what was their political motivation?

throwaway91111 10y ago
It doesn't take much to let something happen when the correct course is to do nothing.
- hellbanner 10y ago
  No nation exists in a vacuum.

dashundchen 10y ago

The same Scott Adams who sockpuppets on message boards and reddit, to agree with himself and call himself a genius? Yeah I'd take the shadowban claims with a grain of salt. http://comicsalliance.com/scott-adams-plannedchaos-sockpuppet/ http://comicsalliance.com/scott-adams-plannedchaos-sockpuppe...