3 ms·
That's a really long way of trying to justify unfairness under some arbitrary criteria. If Twitter's policy is to surpress under some criteria (e.g. data illeg
by bassman9000 6y ago
That's a really long way of trying to justify unfairness under some arbitrary criteria.
If Twitter's policy is to surpress under some criteria (e.g. data illegally obtained), and they're not doing so every single time (they don't), then they're unfair on the arbitrary application of that criteria.
- pron 6y agoThe criterion can be that stories that are unfairly promoted are penalised. HN does something similar.
- bassman9000 6y agoThus paving the way for being arbitrary. Because the decision of what's fair is hidden. That's not criteria: is lack of. I understand you can't 100% define what's fair. That's why judges interpret. But if Jack has to come out to state they screwed up, something's not right. And they're not fixing it, by design: decisions will still be made by highly biased Twitter personnel.