14 ms·
The Twitter Rules
- lightyrs 9y agoTwitter's lawyers are probably out celebrating this weekend.
- crabasa 9y ago> We believe that everyone should have the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers. I can't wait for this to mean what it used to mean: owning a domain and putting up a website.
- quotemstr 9y agoWith registrars being as censorious as they've been lately?
- tehwebguy 9y agoHow censorious have they been lately?
- patrickaljord 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Stormer#Site_hosting_issues_after_the_2017_Unite_the_Right_rally https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Stormer#Site_hosting...
- tehwebguy 9y agoSo these 5 or 10 companies don’t want to host this one website. I guess “Not very censorious” or “Not enough data” is the answer.
- patrickaljord 9y agoIt's not 5 or 10, every single domain provider have banned them so far. Still happening today.
- imron 9y agoLess censorious than Twitter.
- riffic 9y agoYou can do this today; install and maintain an OStatus compliant app on your own domain (gnusocial, mastodon, et cetera)
- crabasa 9y agoI spent a few minutes Googling "OStatus spec". This Medium post [1] on the first page of results sums the prospects of this working nicely: > Federated social networks such as Mastodon and GNUSocial communicate using a protocol known as ‘OStatus’. This is partly documented in an unfinished specification (the OStatus 1.0 Draft 2.0 document), and is otherwise defined by some parties as a non-living anti-standard which is ‘whatever it has been historically’, or the exact opposite ‘whatever it needs to be’, usually further qualified as ‘well, whatever my software, the one true use case, thinks it needs to be’. [1] https://medium.com/@Rushyo/on-supporting-content-types-other-than-html-in-ostatus-a5b675c1b3a3?source=linkShare-ad5c954d0329-1511070833 https://medium.com/@Rushyo/on-supporting-content-types-other...
- tscs37 9y agoMastodon has recently enabled Activity Streams 2.0 (I'm fairly certain 2.0) which is a W3C Standard. I believe the move was founded on arguments of "OStatus is a tad unflexible for our needs" or something along those lines.
- ryandrake 9y agoI love it! One happy-talk sentence that contradicts the rest of the article, wherein all the barriers are listed in great detail.
- rspeer 9y ago> Accounts using unauthorized badges as part of their profile photos, header photos, display names, [...] Interesting. Of course there's no way to put an actual badge in your display name. But this sounds like it's targeted at Julian Assange, who ends his name with a blue diamond emoji that is reminiscent of a verified badge if you're not looking closely.
- ceejayoz 9y agoI hope they don't act on Assange's blue emoji. It's gloriously petulant (as is Twitter's refusal to verify the account, in fairness) and deserves to be preserved.
- TazeTSchnitzel 9y agoThey banned it from new display names, I guess he was “grandfathered” in.
- ericdykstra 9y agoTwitter's enforcement of their rules is so arbitrary and selective I wonder why they even have them. Innocuous accounts get banned over banter, people get their "Verified" status stripped from them if they say the wrong thing (shouldn't it just mean "this person is who they say they are"?), and yet there are accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers that doxx people and tell their followers to harass them. It's still a useful platform for now, but they seem to be trying their hardest to be anti-user.
- tptacek 9y agoIt does not simply mean "this person is who they say they are" and never has. Everybody knowledgeable about Twitter (including Twitter themselves) who makes this claim is gaslighting. Twitter's own documentation explains that the blue checkmark is reserved for accounts of "public interest". The checkmarks are displayed prominently in the avatar photo of accounts, rather than simply as an element of a user's profile. Verified Twitter accounts are promoted Twitter accounts. Twitter does the blue checkmark thing as a perk to attract noteworthy people to their platform, and to draw the attention of ordinary users to those noteworthy people.
- Crontab 9y ago> It does not simply mean "this person is who they say they are" and never has. I was under the same impression that OP was, so I looked up the verified account announcement from the Twitter in 2009[1]: "To prevent identity confusion, Twitter is experimenting (beta testing) with a 'Verified Account' feature. We're working to establish authenticity with people who deal with impersonation or identity confusion on a regular basis." [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20090615114316/http://twitter.com/help/verified https://web.archive.org/web/20090615114316/http://twitter.co...
- ben1040 9y agoMeanwhile when they opened up the application process for anyone to request verification, they made the implication that a verified account was a "high quality" account you might want to follow. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/twitter-announces-application-process-for-verified-accounts-300300831.html https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/twitter-announces-a... >We hope opening up this application process results in more people finding great, high-quality accounts to follow This seems to be where the line started blurring between "this is who they say they are" and "this account is an asset to our platform."
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- YouAreGreat 9y agoEven though superficially they are cracking down on every conceivable way of abusing and harming others, including mere "wishing" for harm, I see nothing about one of their user's favorite pastime: Attempting to cause economic damage to a target, such as loss of customers or loss of job. It's an interesting omission.
- sintaxi 9y agoWhat a disaster. Comparing twitter of today to what it once was makes me sad.