4 ms·

It would be more helpful to provide substance to this claim rather than tossing a smoke grenade on the matter? Who are the left leaning people you’ve seen suspe

It would be more helpful to provide substance to this claim rather than tossing a smoke grenade on the matter? Who are the left leaning people you’ve seen suspended?

zimpenfish 8y ago
Here's a few to get you started. https://twitter.com/zozie_kicks/status/1078008088978956289 https://twitter.com/zozie_kicks/status/1078008088978956289 https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ban-us-mid-term-elections https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ba... https://www.dailydot.com/unclick/twitter-suspends-krang-t-nelson/ https://www.dailydot.com/unclick/twitter-suspends-krang-t-ne...
- vinniejames 8y ago
  Intentionally getting banned by doing something publicly known to be bannable doesn't really apply here httpswitter.com/zozie_kicks/status/1078008088978956289
  - zimpenfish 8y ago
    Well, it was a test to see if it was the word 'goy' that was the trigger - previous suspensions had already happened. But fair point, it's not a great example.
- repolfx 8y ago
  The first is about testing for banned words deliberately. The second link appears to be about anti-spam suspensions related to people who controlled many different Twitter accounts simultaneously using bots, not content related enforcement. The third link is about the following tweet: "Can’t wait for November 4th when millions of antifa supersoldiers will behead all white parents and small business owners in the town square" That isn't an "innocuous reply to harrassment" as you implied in your first comment. So far I don't think you've demonstrated the point you were trying to make. None of the examples of these suspensions were replies to harassment.
  - zimpenfish 8y ago
    > The first is about testing for banned words deliberately. After being banned for using those words inocuously. > That isn't an "innocuous reply to harrassment" as you implied in your first comment. No, that wasn't one of those. It was clearly a joke, however. > None of the examples of these suspensions were replies to harassment A fair point. Next time I log into Twitter, I'll make a collection and come back with those, ok? I just didn't happen to have one ready for this discussion at current time.

It would be more helpful to provide substance to this claim rather than tossing a smoke grenade on the matter? Who are the left leaning people you’ve seen suspended?

zimpenfish 8y ago

Here's a few to get you started. https://twitter.com/zozie_kicks/status/1078008088978956289 https://twitter.com/zozie_kicks/status/1078008088978956289 https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ban-us-mid-term-elections https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ba... https://www.dailydot.com/unclick/twitter-suspends-krang-t-nelson/ https://www.dailydot.com/unclick/twitter-suspends-krang-t-ne...

vinniejames 8y ago
Intentionally getting banned by doing something publicly known to be bannable doesn't really apply here httpswitter.com/zozie_kicks/status/1078008088978956289
- zimpenfish 8y ago
  Well, it was a test to see if it was the word 'goy' that was the trigger - previous suspensions had already happened. But fair point, it's not a great example.
repolfx 8y ago
The first is about testing for banned words deliberately. The second link appears to be about anti-spam suspensions related to people who controlled many different Twitter accounts simultaneously using bots, not content related enforcement. The third link is about the following tweet: "Can’t wait for November 4th when millions of antifa supersoldiers will behead all white parents and small business owners in the town square" That isn't an "innocuous reply to harrassment" as you implied in your first comment. So far I don't think you've demonstrated the point you were trying to make. None of the examples of these suspensions were replies to harassment.
- zimpenfish 8y ago
  > The first is about testing for banned words deliberately. After being banned for using those words inocuously. > That isn't an "innocuous reply to harrassment" as you implied in your first comment. No, that wasn't one of those. It was clearly a joke, however. > None of the examples of these suspensions were replies to harassment A fair point. Next time I log into Twitter, I'll make a collection and come back with those, ok? I just didn't happen to have one ready for this discussion at current time.