3 ms·

Twitter has become the de facto standard, so IMHO moderation should only ask one question: "is this tweet legal?" If the answer is 'yes' then it should be allow

Twitter has become the de facto standard, so IMHO moderation should only ask one question: "is this tweet legal?" If the answer is 'yes' then it should be allowed. Of course, a corollary is that they should be able to filter content on a per country basis because, obviously, what's legal differs from country to country, but I think there is no escaping that for any platforms which claim to be global.

fckgw 4y ago
Sounds like a great way to foster a community filled with racist, unwelcoming, and generally toxic but perfectly legal content. Just like every other "free speech" platform devolves into.
- kelseyfrog 4y ago
  Allow me to coin a hyperstitious and eponymous law. Frog's Law of Social Media: free speech or advertising revenue - choose one.
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  Can we stick to a grown-up discussion, please? You are not replying to my points in any meaningful way. It's shocking that HN commenters could be so toxic, indeed.
  - fckgw 4y ago
    Not sure what there is to discuss? I wholly disagree with your idea. There's plenty of other social network sites that have a similar moderation policy and they are overrun by people who wish to turn it into a platform to spread hate. Any content moderation needs to extend beyond "Legal? (Y/N)" unless your main goal is to drive any real community away.
    - mytailorisrich 4y ago
      You're obviously ignoring 'de facto standard', which makes Twitter pretty much a utility in my opinion, hence my comment. Anyway, it is simply shocking that so many think it is the 'correct way' to disallow what they don't agree with and that they are, like you, so aggressive about it to the point of shutting down any dissenting opinions, as is happening here. It's a big regression from the heights of the enlightenment, or just the recent past, IMHO. Some would go as far as claiming that this is "little red guard" behaviour and they wouldn't be completely wrong. Good day.
      - FireBeyond 4y ago
        What is your opinion on Parler deleting anti-Trump messages? Or liberal viewpoints? Or r/conservative banning people who have posted on any one of a number of other subreddits, sometimes before they've even posted in r/conservative?
        mytailorisrich 4y ago
        Whataboutism... Edit: Not only that but also transparently disingenuous. I don't know r/conservative (my comments are not about liberal vs conservative and I find odd that you and others immediately frame them that way) but a dedicated 'conservative' subreddit is obviously not the same as Twitter, which, again as become the de facto standard for most political and news communication.
        FireBeyond 4y ago
        Not even remotely. I didn't agree or disagree with your statement on Twitter allowing all legal posts. I expressly chose not to. What I'm asking you is if you think that those forums should also be required to say "Legal (Y/N)?" and if not, why not?
        sarlalian 4y ago
        It's a fair assumption. The free speech absolutist crowd very much tends to trend conservative. I think most reasonable people would reject the assertion that twitter is the de facto standard. It isn't even in the top 10 for social media platforms by active monthly users, and usage and value of a platform varies way too much depending on age and gender. While twitter is possibly the de facto standard for gen-x + millennials and certain career groups such as politicians and journalists, it certainly won't be for 18-25 year olds. Facebook still has nearly 10x the monthly active users of twitter, in fact Twitter barely beats out Quora. Ignoring the argument about it being the de facto standard, Twitter is a business. I expect that Elon would like to make money off of his $44B investment. In the battle between the free market and free speech, the free market will almost always win. If twitter goes the extreme free speech route, users who are often targeted by loud jerks, trolls and harassers will leave the platform. It will create bad press both in the form of people complaining about harassment as well as other businesses pulling ads where their customers or potential customers were harassed.
    - cvwright 4y ago
      Twitter is full of awful people too. They’re just on the other end of the political spectrum.
mikkergp 4y ago
What about “this pattern of tweets is sufficiently correlated with declining user engagement”. Should Twitter make decisions based on the health of the business?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
yibg 4y ago
Do you have any example of an open forum that only removes illegal content and nothing else that isn't also a complete cesspool?
Beltalowda 4y ago
I would stay well within the law if I would reply to your post with "oh fuck off you retarded cunt!!!" This would obviously fall well within the protections of free speech for many countries, certainly those of the U.S. And if you really wanted to you can go much nastier than that. But I don't think it should be allowed here, or even on Twitter. Even using as an example here already feels iffy, but I feel adding it makes the point clearer.
- mytailorisrich 4y ago
  But you are not making any points here, just basically a stunt. If Twitter is the de facto standard and akin to an utility why should they make decisions on what's allowed beyond lawfulness?
  - Beltalowda 4y ago
    > But you are not making any points here, just basically a stunt. My point is that allowing "anything that's within the law" will lead to some pretty unpleasant stuff. > If Twitter is the de facto standard and akin to an utility why should they make decisions on what's allowed beyond lawfulness? I don't think Twitter is the "de-facto standard" or akin to an utility, and the problem is that by allowing such content you would drive away a lot of people who would rather not be buried with insults and nastiness every time they post something. There are loads of places where speech is regulated in some way, and you can't just go off on a expletive-laden rant at any moment. If I go to a Biden or Trump Q&A townhall meeting and start shouting abuse at him I will be removed as well.
    - mytailorisrich 4y ago
      You're still attempting to take my comments to the extreme instead of making a substantial reply on any of my points (unfortunately). In addition, whether a certain moderation approach would "drive away people" is a strawman. This is not the question.
      - Beltalowda 4y ago

fckgw 4y ago

Sounds like a great way to foster a community filled with racist, unwelcoming, and generally toxic but perfectly legal content. Just like every other "free speech" platform devolves into.

kelseyfrog 4y ago
Allow me to coin a hyperstitious and eponymous law. Frog's Law of Social Media: free speech or advertising revenue - choose one.
mytailorisrich 4y ago
Can we stick to a grown-up discussion, please? You are not replying to my points in any meaningful way. It's shocking that HN commenters could be so toxic, indeed.
- fckgw 4y ago
  Not sure what there is to discuss? I wholly disagree with your idea. There's plenty of other social network sites that have a similar moderation policy and they are overrun by people who wish to turn it into a platform to spread hate. Any content moderation needs to extend beyond "Legal? (Y/N)" unless your main goal is to drive any real community away.
  - mytailorisrich 4y ago
    You're obviously ignoring 'de facto standard', which makes Twitter pretty much a utility in my opinion, hence my comment. Anyway, it is simply shocking that so many think it is the 'correct way' to disallow what they don't agree with and that they are, like you, so aggressive about it to the point of shutting down any dissenting opinions, as is happening here. It's a big regression from the heights of the enlightenment, or just the recent past, IMHO. Some would go as far as claiming that this is "little red guard" behaviour and they wouldn't be completely wrong. Good day.
    - FireBeyond 4y ago
      What is your opinion on Parler deleting anti-Trump messages? Or liberal viewpoints? Or r/conservative banning people who have posted on any one of a number of other subreddits, sometimes before they've even posted in r/conservative?
      - mytailorisrich 4y ago
        Whataboutism... Edit: Not only that but also transparently disingenuous. I don't know r/conservative (my comments are not about liberal vs conservative and I find odd that you and others immediately frame them that way) but a dedicated 'conservative' subreddit is obviously not the same as Twitter, which, again as become the de facto standard for most political and news communication.
        FireBeyond 4y ago
        Not even remotely. I didn't agree or disagree with your statement on Twitter allowing all legal posts. I expressly chose not to. What I'm asking you is if you think that those forums should also be required to say "Legal (Y/N)?" and if not, why not?
        sarlalian 4y ago
        It's a fair assumption. The free speech absolutist crowd very much tends to trend conservative. I think most reasonable people would reject the assertion that twitter is the de facto standard. It isn't even in the top 10 for social media platforms by active monthly users, and usage and value of a platform varies way too much depending on age and gender. While twitter is possibly the de facto standard for gen-x + millennials and certain career groups such as politicians and journalists, it certainly won't be for 18-25 year olds. Facebook still has nearly 10x the monthly active users of twitter, in fact Twitter barely beats out Quora. Ignoring the argument about it being the de facto standard, Twitter is a business. I expect that Elon would like to make money off of his $44B investment. In the battle between the free market and free speech, the free market will almost always win. If twitter goes the extreme free speech route, users who are often targeted by loud jerks, trolls and harassers will leave the platform. It will create bad press both in the form of people complaining about harassment as well as other businesses pulling ads where their customers or potential customers were harassed.
  - cvwright 4y ago
    Twitter is full of awful people too. They’re just on the other end of the political spectrum.

mikkergp 4y ago

What about “this pattern of tweets is sufficiently correlated with declining user engagement”. Should Twitter make decisions based on the health of the business?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

yibg 4y ago

Do you have any example of an open forum that only removes illegal content and nothing else that isn't also a complete cesspool?

Beltalowda 4y ago

I would stay well within the law if I would reply to your post with "oh fuck off you retarded cunt!!!" This would obviously fall well within the protections of free speech for many countries, certainly those of the U.S. And if you really wanted to you can go much nastier than that. But I don't think it should be allowed here, or even on Twitter. Even using as an example here already feels iffy, but I feel adding it makes the point clearer.

mytailorisrich 4y ago
But you are not making any points here, just basically a stunt. If Twitter is the de facto standard and akin to an utility why should they make decisions on what's allowed beyond lawfulness?
- Beltalowda 4y ago
  > But you are not making any points here, just basically a stunt. My point is that allowing "anything that's within the law" will lead to some pretty unpleasant stuff. > If Twitter is the de facto standard and akin to an utility why should they make decisions on what's allowed beyond lawfulness? I don't think Twitter is the "de-facto standard" or akin to an utility, and the problem is that by allowing such content you would drive away a lot of people who would rather not be buried with insults and nastiness every time they post something. There are loads of places where speech is regulated in some way, and you can't just go off on a expletive-laden rant at any moment. If I go to a Biden or Trump Q&A townhall meeting and start shouting abuse at him I will be removed as well.
  - mytailorisrich 4y ago
    You're still attempting to take my comments to the extreme instead of making a substantial reply on any of my points (unfortunately). In addition, whether a certain moderation approach would "drive away people" is a strawman. This is not the question.
    - Beltalowda 4y ago