4 ms·
The original question was would Twitter have "Kept the comedian's account active even if she impersonated Parag" The question presents her impersonating Parag
by theonething 4y ago
The original question was would Twitter have "Kept the comedian's account active even if she impersonated Parag"
The question presents her impersonating Parag as a given hypothetical situation and asks what would Twitter have done in that situation. The essence of the question is would Parag have allowed for impersonation of accounts?
Your comment is a non sequitur.
- socialismisok 4y agoThe answer is still yes. This practice was extremely common in Twitter.
- theonething 4y agohmm.. here's an archive page from Twitter from January of this year about parody account policy https://web.archive.org/web/20220108193314/https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/parody-account-policy https://web.archive.org/web/20220108193314/https://help.twit... > The account name (note: this is separate from the username, or @handle) should clearly indicate that the user is not affiliated with the subject of the account. Non-affiliation can be indicated by incorporating, for example, words such as (but not limited to) "parody," "fake," "fan," or "commentary.” Kathy Griffin's name change did not indicate it was parody as stipulated above, it was changed to just "Elon Musk", a clear violation of this rule that existed way before Elon got involved. So you're saying Parag would for some reason just ignore this rule. I find that hard to believe. P.S. You also said pre-Musk Twitter probably wouldn't have had a massive layoff. They were planning to.