4 ms·

tl;dr: 1. important entities like American government administrators and political candidates can report Twitter ToS violation for review via a dedicated line

tl;dr: 1. important entities like American government administrators and political candidates can report Twitter ToS violation for review via a dedicated line with a fast expected turnaround 2. the Biden laptop story was treated as misinformation for 24 hours before being corrected The 11th tweet supposes to "release the kraken" here: > This system wasn't balanced. It was based on contacts. Because Twitter was and is overwhelmingly staffed by people of one political orientation, there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right. TBH I would be happy to see an argument for this. As always I am left disappointed. The thread continues on to contradict this point by showing a number of Republicans complaining via exactly such contacts. In 24 hours the situation is corrected. In any case if you know how campaigns work, #1 is not shocking at all - I'd assume at a minimum the safety teams for each candidate have and use direct lines to Twitter's moderators. No evidence is shown that submitting things for review equates to an expectation on either side of an order being carried out (by the non-governing Biden team, nonetheless). Finally I don't think this is the best evidence of an imbalance - the situation was corrected and reversed... This does seem to be peak American politics "leap to any conclusions your reality supports". We cannot make arguments in good faith any more, because we do not agree on or even look at the facts on their merits, but rather just assume the "other side" is an idiot. So, big letdown. I'll wait for thread #2, maybe we will see more tangible evidence.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
rpmisms 4y ago
> TBH I would be happy to see an argument for this. As always I am left disappointed. It is (was) reality. Have you met average big-tech non-coder?
- justsomeadvice0 4y ago
  Here are the parts of the statement I am disappointed with, to clarify, emphasis mine: > *This system wasn't balanced.* It was based on contacts. ... there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right. I can certainly agree with the fact that 90+% of Big Tech employees vote Democrat (I'm not sure what "non-coder" has to do with it). 100% true. I have worked at large corporations for a long time, so I know a second fact: corporate employees do not make any controversial decisions you will hear about as an outsider. At best we get to present feedback to our boss. Here we see an employee making such a decision by themself; now let's make an assumption and say this was done to promote their leftist agenda. Within 24 hours, the decision is overridden and it is made clear who the real agenda-setters are at most Big Tech. I'll give you a hint: it's not the employees, and it was only 2% Jack.
  - rpmisms 4y ago
    > I'm not sure what "non-coder" has to do with it In my experience, engineers are more likely to be pragmatic people, which is more of a right-wing/libertarian trait. This is not a constant. > Within 24 hours, the decision is overridden and it is made clear who the real agenda-setters are at most Big Tech. It is overridden quietly, with no apology or acknowledgement of the harm they did. If this was something anyone in leadership actually cared about, we'd see the typical PR response. Instead, crickets.
    - justsomeadvice0 4y ago
      So the big scandal, the thing to get upset about here, Elon's dramatic reveal: is that Twitter's leaders "didn't care" enough? If you listen carefully, behind the crickets, you can hear the goalposts moving.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

rpmisms 4y ago

> TBH I would be happy to see an argument for this. As always I am left disappointed. It is (was) reality. Have you met average big-tech non-coder?

justsomeadvice0 4y ago
Here are the parts of the statement I am disappointed with, to clarify, emphasis mine: > *This system wasn't balanced.* It was based on contacts. ... there were more channels, more ways to complain, open to the left (well, Democrats) than the right. I can certainly agree with the fact that 90+% of Big Tech employees vote Democrat (I'm not sure what "non-coder" has to do with it). 100% true. I have worked at large corporations for a long time, so I know a second fact: corporate employees do not make any controversial decisions you will hear about as an outsider. At best we get to present feedback to our boss. Here we see an employee making such a decision by themself; now let's make an assumption and say this was done to promote their leftist agenda. Within 24 hours, the decision is overridden and it is made clear who the real agenda-setters are at most Big Tech. I'll give you a hint: it's not the employees, and it was only 2% Jack.
- rpmisms 4y ago
  > I'm not sure what "non-coder" has to do with it In my experience, engineers are more likely to be pragmatic people, which is more of a right-wing/libertarian trait. This is not a constant. > Within 24 hours, the decision is overridden and it is made clear who the real agenda-setters are at most Big Tech. It is overridden quietly, with no apology or acknowledgement of the harm they did. If this was something anyone in leadership actually cared about, we'd see the typical PR response. Instead, crickets.
  - justsomeadvice0 4y ago
    So the big scandal, the thing to get upset about here, Elon's dramatic reveal: is that Twitter's leaders "didn't care" enough? If you listen carefully, behind the crickets, you can hear the goalposts moving.