3 ms·

You and me have an extremely different definition of personal vendetta!

• akersten 7y ago
  That's fair, "vendetta" is too strong of a word. "Personal bias" is better-suited. It's just hard to read a post calling them "internet vampires" and still assume a neutral author.
  • t0mbstone 7y ago
    But Twitter has objectively proven themselves to be "celebrity vampires" by selectively applying different sets of rules to celebrities than to common people. For example, it is against Twitter's official rules (https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules) for a user to use their platform to say hateful or racist things, and they regularly ban people for violating those conditions, but they they regularly allow famous people (like the President of the USA) to get away with violating many of those rules. Why does Twitter let Trump (and many other famous people) get away with breaking the rules? Because Twitter directly benefits from the viewers and the outrage. Acknowledging that fact (and yes, it is a provable fact) hardly means someone has a personal vendetta against Twitter.
    • manicdee 7y ago
      It’s especially common for Twitter, upon receiving complaints from a POC about racial harassment, to ban the victim.