3 ms·

Interesting possible grey area. Presumably, though, the performer has already plugged the show on their own profile...

by jjulius 4y ago

ceejayoz 4y ago
“regardless if this information is publicly available”
- jjulius 4y ago
  I'd encourage you to read the full post[1]. First, this is very clearly talking about private information, and a concert or performance is public. There's also a whole lot of nuance, for instance... >We also consider who is sharing the reported information and whether or not they have the consent of the person it belongs to. We do this because we know that there are times when people may want some forms of their personal information to be shared publicly. ... and... >If the reported information was shared somewhere else before it was shared on Twitter, e.g., someone sharing their personal phone number on their own publicly accessible website, we may not treat this information as private, as the owner has made it publicly available. ... and especially... >We also factor in the intent of the person sharing the information. [1]https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-information https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-info...
  - thebooktocome 4y ago
    > Under this policy, you can’t share the following types of private information, without the permission of the person who it belongs to: . . . > live location information, including information shared on Twitter directly or links to 3rd-party URL(s) of travel routes, actual physical location, or other identifying information that would reveal a person’s location, regardless if this information is publicly available; This bullet point has none of the caveats that you are hinging your defense of their policy on.
    - jjulius 4y ago
      >Under this policy, you can’t share the following types of private information... I don't know how else to tell you that a concert isn't private information.
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
        Neither is the location of Elon’s jet, yet this policy is obviously targeted at that. “the owner has made it publicly available” also describes Elon’s ADS-B receiver, incidentally. It broadcasts to the public.
        jjulius 4y ago
        Okay? And still obviously not about concerts and performers...
      - thebooktocome 4y ago
        You're misreading the policy. It defines the subsequent bullet points as "private information", it does not restrict the scope of those bullet points to some other external definition of "private information". More explicitly, legally speaking, "the following types of private information" means "the following list of things, which we are calling private information", not "the following list of things, when they are considered as private information (defined elsewhere)".
        jjulius 4y ago
        It's painfully obvious reading through the entire document that comments akin to, "I'm at [venue] seeing [performer]!" are allowed. Beyond what I've already shared, there is also... >What is not a violation of this policy? >sharing information that is publicly available elsewhere, in a non-abusive manner (with the exception of live location information) "I'm at [venue] seeing [performer]!" is non-abusive, and the information is available through advertising for the show, signage on the venue itself, the venue's website, the venue's social media profiles, the ticketing company's website, the artist's website, the artist's social media profiles, the promoter's social media pages, media stories, the list goes on. It's hastily written, yes, but in the context of the broader happenings at Twitter, and what people generally use it for (eg, musicians are gonna want to tell people where they are, and they're gonna want people to tell other people they saw them, and the venue is gonna want the promotion, etc.), this is pretty obvious.

Interesting possible grey area. Presumably, though, the performer has already plugged the show on their own profile...

ceejayoz 4y ago

“regardless if this information is publicly available”

jjulius 4y ago
I'd encourage you to read the full post[1]. First, this is very clearly talking about private information, and a concert or performance is public. There's also a whole lot of nuance, for instance... >We also consider who is sharing the reported information and whether or not they have the consent of the person it belongs to. We do this because we know that there are times when people may want some forms of their personal information to be shared publicly. ... and... >If the reported information was shared somewhere else before it was shared on Twitter, e.g., someone sharing their personal phone number on their own publicly accessible website, we may not treat this information as private, as the owner has made it publicly available. ... and especially... >We also factor in the intent of the person sharing the information. [1]https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-information https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-info...
- thebooktocome 4y ago
  > Under this policy, you can’t share the following types of private information, without the permission of the person who it belongs to: . . . > live location information, including information shared on Twitter directly or links to 3rd-party URL(s) of travel routes, actual physical location, or other identifying information that would reveal a person’s location, regardless if this information is publicly available; This bullet point has none of the caveats that you are hinging your defense of their policy on.
  - jjulius 4y ago
    >Under this policy, you can’t share the following types of private information... I don't know how else to tell you that a concert isn't private information.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      Neither is the location of Elon’s jet, yet this policy is obviously targeted at that. “the owner has made it publicly available” also describes Elon’s ADS-B receiver, incidentally. It broadcasts to the public.
      - jjulius 4y ago
        Okay? And still obviously not about concerts and performers...
    - thebooktocome 4y ago
      You're misreading the policy. It defines the subsequent bullet points as "private information", it does not restrict the scope of those bullet points to some other external definition of "private information". More explicitly, legally speaking, "the following types of private information" means "the following list of things, which we are calling private information", not "the following list of things, when they are considered as private information (defined elsewhere)".
      - jjulius 4y ago
        It's painfully obvious reading through the entire document that comments akin to, "I'm at [venue] seeing [performer]!" are allowed. Beyond what I've already shared, there is also... >What is not a violation of this policy? >sharing information that is publicly available elsewhere, in a non-abusive manner (with the exception of live location information) "I'm at [venue] seeing [performer]!" is non-abusive, and the information is available through advertising for the show, signage on the venue itself, the venue's website, the venue's social media profiles, the ticketing company's website, the artist's website, the artist's social media profiles, the promoter's social media pages, media stories, the list goes on. It's hastily written, yes, but in the context of the broader happenings at Twitter, and what people generally use it for (eg, musicians are gonna want to tell people where they are, and they're gonna want people to tell other people they saw them, and the venue is gonna want the promotion, etc.), this is pretty obvious.