4 ms·

Maybe they should disable the ability to comment instead? It seems to me that comments are often a big problem on social media. When comments stay relevant and

Maybe they should disable the ability to comment instead? It seems to me that comments are often a big problem on social media. When comments stay relevant and informative, like they do here on HN, for the most part anyway. They are an asset to the social media, but as soon as they become something else they become a big problem. Maybe they shouldn’t be disabled entirely, but instead you’d need to be approved by the poster to comment? I could see a value in giving users the control over you would allow to comment on your tweet.

Kaveren 8y ago
That takes the social out of social media. Also gives way to a complete echo chamber.
- eksemplar 8y ago
  What’s social about a bunch of strangers screaming profanities at each other? It should really be called angry mob media, if anything. I see your point of course, but I’m not really worried about creating echo chambers by giving users more ownership over their own conversations. If you started screaming at me in the real world, I’d walk away and probably never talk to you again. That’s an echo chamber, but it’s relatively harmless, and I think the same thing would apply to almost all of social media. I’m sure political tweeters would be terrible at it, but would it really change anything? Right now thousands of people are trolling each other in Donald Trumps twitter feed, but do you think they make a difference? I don’t, in fact I don’t think anyone has ever really been pursauded of anything in a political twitter comment section. Mean while, the rest of us are taken hostage by the angry mob and a lack of control of what ought to be our content.
Marazan 8y ago
Twitter communities is a similar idea I had a while ago. The ability to create invite only super-hashtag. Only people invited to the hashtag can reply but everyone can read. It seems to solve many of the current Twitter problems (apart from the whole failing to ban Nazis thing) but does create extra ones around community management of who gets to make invites/kick people from the community has tags

Kaveren 8y ago

That takes the social out of social media. Also gives way to a complete echo chamber.

eksemplar 8y ago
What’s social about a bunch of strangers screaming profanities at each other? It should really be called angry mob media, if anything. I see your point of course, but I’m not really worried about creating echo chambers by giving users more ownership over their own conversations. If you started screaming at me in the real world, I’d walk away and probably never talk to you again. That’s an echo chamber, but it’s relatively harmless, and I think the same thing would apply to almost all of social media. I’m sure political tweeters would be terrible at it, but would it really change anything? Right now thousands of people are trolling each other in Donald Trumps twitter feed, but do you think they make a difference? I don’t, in fact I don’t think anyone has ever really been pursauded of anything in a political twitter comment section. Mean while, the rest of us are taken hostage by the angry mob and a lack of control of what ought to be our content.

Marazan 8y ago

Twitter communities is a similar idea I had a while ago. The ability to create invite only super-hashtag. Only people invited to the hashtag can reply but everyone can read. It seems to solve many of the current Twitter problems (apart from the whole failing to ban Nazis thing) but does create extra ones around community management of who gets to make invites/kick people from the community has tags