8 ms·

> Here’s the thing: I’m a stinker. Even at my jolliest, if someone figuratively shoulder-checks me, I’m probably going to make so many mountains out of this mol

• teawrecks 4y ago
  What is the clear path?
  • snoopy_telex 4y ago
    Admitting that the tweet is revenge porn by closing the review request and deleting the tweet. I mean, in this case, I’d likely keep forcing the review too. This is clearly just a bad detection
    • vorticalbox 4y ago
      Will this not cause more issues? They will very likely use these appeals to help train the content AI. You're rewardimg it for a wrong decision that it will use for future decisions.
    • zdragnar 4y ago
      That's literally admitting to a crime. Even if the crime didn't actually happen, the tweet is gone, so now he's left with having admitted to a crime and no evidence to show that he didn't actually commit it.
      • pvg 4y ago
        It's not literally admitting to a crime. If I said that if you reply to this comment, you stole my wallet and you reply, you're not admitting you stole my wallet.
        • thiht 4y ago
          Is it a stretch to assume Twitter will assume he admitted to the crime though? I’m pretty sure in a en somewhere the author will be flagged as « this account posted confirmed revenge porn in 2022 ». What if their bots think another tweet of his is revenge porn? Will they ban him forever with no appeal? What if they decide to report it to the authorities? What if Twitter decides to show this info on profile pages to warn the users of potentially offensive users? What if there’s a leak and the author becomes publicly flagged as someone who posts revenge porn? Honestly this is scary as fuck.
          • pvg 4y ago
            It is a gigantic stretch, yes. If twitter thinks you posted 'confirmed revenge porn' they'd ban your account (as stated in their policy on the subject) and probably report you to law enforcement. If that happened over a cat game video then yes, that would be bad, disturbing, scary, you name it. That's a 100% not what happened, though, and turning it into some narrative about implacable machines grinding down our inalienable human rights is a mistake.
            • thiht 4y ago
              So why don’t they unban him without the need to delete the tweet?
              • pvg 4y ago
                I don't know, they're fucked up and have fucked up? But that's the whole point, twitter fucking up is not an accusation of a crime. It's twitter fucking up.
    • Arisaka1 4y ago
      The clear path is... lying about his content? If that's your definition of a system working as intended, we have a problem.
  • deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  • philipswood 4y ago
    "you cannot be unsuspended until either they agree your appeal is correct (which it is), you give up your appeal (never), and/or delete the offending tweet." Delete the offending tweet.
    • dqpb 4y ago
      Impossible for someone with a spine.
    • MikeDelta 4y ago
      Just speculating (I hope) but curious what others think. Say that a video is flagged, user gets the above response and user simply deletes the video. To me it feels like an implicit admission, not having any additional information like "you were right, sorry" or "it is totally incorrect but easier to do this than to fight it". And say only this metadata is stored, not the video itself, it becomes impossible to judge afterwards. And say once in a while these logs are reviewed by another party (law enforcement perhaps). Might that be sufficient to end up one some kind of watch list?
    • Thorrez 4y ago
      The author doesn't mention this in the article, but I think deleting the tweet requires you to acknowledge that it broke the rules: https://twitter.com/Raddagher/status/1533326201602707458/photo/2 https://twitter.com/Raddagher/status/1533326201602707458/pho... Which in this case I think would be a lie. Yes I agree the author should be less prideful and not call Twitter employees "dense" in an appeal. But I don't think the solution is to say the author should lie and say the tweet did break the rules. Or maybe the rules could be interpreted as "anything that Twitter says breaks the rules does break the rules", meaning it wouldn't be a lie to acknowledge the tweet broke the rules. I haven't analyzed the rules closely.
• edmcnulty101 4y ago
  What is the clear path? According to the article he properly followed all of Twitters procedures by appealing TWICE.
• saxonww 4y ago
  Ideally people would just quietly stop using Twitter and services like it en masse, but that's not going to happen, so it's reasonable for people to complain about mistreatment. And that's what this is: the author got banned for their post violating a 'revenge porn' rule when that's not even close to what they posted. Twitter's content moderation didn't work here. It banned someone incorrectly. That person used the appeal process and was denied, even though the content in question unequivocally does not violate the cited rule. Twitter has no obligation to host anyone's content, and they are within their rights to deny service to someone whenever and for just about whatever reason they want. But this is how you're supposed to handle it! If you've been mistreated by Twitter, you say something, people see it, and they take it into consideration when thinking whether they'd like to start/continue using Twitter.
  • cgriswald 4y ago
    This guy is upset that the free service he uses employs imperfect AI and it affected him personally. I agree we shouldn't be using AI for everything and we might even include humans after an AI makes a call just to verify the call. However, that has a cost and this guy isn't paying. I'd guess this guy wouldn't pay, because having to deal with occasional AI errors is part of the cost and he clearly doesn't want to pay. So he appealed. Sure. Here's his appeal: > This is a video from the PlayStation5 game Stray. You cannot possible be this dense. Verbally abusing reps like this is not acceptable and certainly does nothing to make me sympathetic to this guy. Who would want to help this guy? Even when I was a minimum wage employee at a fast food chain policy was people verbally abusing employees didn't get our food. So, the appeal was denied. Now he's going on the warpath because he's 'right'. He's not right. He was right that the ban was nonsense and should not have happened. He stopped being right with his verbal abuse. His idea to win them over? By fucking himself over. He has 57K followers. That's not nothing to him but in the grand scheme it's essentially nothing to Twitter. He's a supplicant but he thinks he's king. He has no leverage here and rather than being nice he's saying he's going to be more of a jerk. I won't even wish him good luck.
    • Firmwarrior 4y ago
      I don't have a Twitter account and I never will at this rate, since all I ever hear about Twitter is what a shithole it is. Twitter isn't showing me ads and I'm not posting things that could draw more users to Twitter to see more ads. That seems like a real cost to me
• soraminazuki 4y ago
  Wow, the author got falsely accused of posting revenge porn, a criminal act by the way, and your answer is take it? Why are you so intent on attacking the author’s character for simply defending himself?
  • pvg 4y ago
    Twitter's auto moderation screwing up on your cat game video is not being 'falsely accused of posting revenge porn, a criminal act'.
    • soraminazuki 4y ago
      Excuse me? That is exactly what Twitter accused the author of doing. The policy which Twitter referred to according to the article has the words “Non-consensual nudity policy” written in huge letters [1]. Do those words mean something other than revenge porn? [1]: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/intimate-media https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/intimate-medi...
      • pvg 4y ago
        They sent him an automated private message misidentifying one of his videos. This is obviously lame and annoying but no, he was not accused of a crime he did not commit or have to escape from a military stockade into the Los Angeles underground.
        • sillysaurusx 4y ago
          As a fly on the wall, I think you’re both right! Both of your points are good, and aren’t mutually exclusive at all. TikTok sends automated messages all the time accusing people of ridiculous things (mostly during livestreams). I bet if you were subjected to that on a regular basis, you might feel a little differently.
        • soraminazuki 4y ago
          So if I send you an automated message saying that you have done something illegal, you’d be fine with that? That’s not accusing you of a crime? That’s absurd.
• dqpb 4y ago
  > I’m sorry, but this is your real problem, not Twitter banning you. I’m sorry, but no it’s not. This is called treating the cause instead of the symptom. More people should do it. The alternative is to acquiesce to the false moral superiority of those in control.
• Barrin92 4y ago
  >This is called “pride” and is historically recognized as one of the largest “problem creators” as far as emotions go yep life sure is easy if you don't have a spine and accomodate to every little act of bullying thrown at you by modern society. It's not the guy who is wrong, it's the world that is wrong, it's good that he understands it. The author refuses to take the 'clear path' because that isn't an actual solution to the problem of faceless organisations taking people's abilit to speak away, and he probably recognizes as someone who has an audience it's responsible to sa that out loud.
  • LAC-Tech 4y ago
    There's a great middle ground "being spineless" and "getting into constant altercations other nothing". For me it's sometimes a pretty hard space to inhabit. It's easier to fly off the handle or seize up and say nothing. But it's much more rewarding, and for me at least has gotten easier as I've gotten older.
• gxnthr 4y ago
  Uhhh, the author did nothing wrong and broke no rules (and yet as pointed out rampant, violent hate speech lives without many problems on social media) . Someone getting slightly and innocently sassy after getting banned for posting a cat video is the problem the author is writing about. They're not trying to get a data with you or something.
• onionisafruit 4y ago
  > This is called "pride" Yes. It's having some pride and not groveling to be allowed back on their platform.
• site-packages1 4y ago
  That was my independent takeaway from the article. And requesting an appeal with the verbiage "you cannot possibly be this dense" is a poor way to treat people, especially when the author admits it was the AI banning, not a person, so it wasn't a front line person being dense in the first place. > There is a clear path to getting unbanned from Twitter, but the author refuses to take it. Shame. I disagree on the latter part, Twitter would be better without these egotistical people on it in the first place.
• SZJX 4y ago
  I don’t see the “clear path” here. As many others explained, deleting the video would both be wrong and potentially problematic. I find it really funny so many people are up in arms against this perceived “verbal abuse” and giving the author a lot of flake for this one single word. The “you” he filled out in the appeal form clearly refers to Twitter as a platform. Maybe it would be clearer if English actually distinguished between the plural form and the singular form of “you”, like in various other languages? Perceiving this as a personal insult is exactly a “pride” issue of the Twitter employee and some of the commentators here, not the author, who IMHO acted perfectly reasonably.
• account42 4y ago
  Putting up with the demands may be the easy way out for the individual in cases like these but I am thankful that there are people like the OP who stand up against it so that we hopefully won't have to put up with worse shit in the future. Abuse only ever stops when there is pushback.