4 ms·

> 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

> 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.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      C’mon, you even cited the “with the exception of live location information” bit. That parenthetical says “you can’t share live location information even in a non-abusive fashion”.
      - jjulius 4y ago
        I think that the two of you know a good deal about what is happening with Twitter right now, why these terms are in place, what they actually target and what they don't. And with all that in mind, I'd wager that the two of you are being willfully obtuse here. Edit: Oh, look! Twitter themselves have specifically supported my read of this[1]: >Content that shares location information related to a public engagement or event, such as a concert or political event, is also permitted. [1]https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1603165967453868032 https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1603165967453868032
        ceejayoz 4y ago
        The fact that this is attempting to specifically target one account is exactly why it's so badly written. It's trying to walk an impossible line of "Elon wants no censorship, but he wants this censored". re: your edit; find that statement in the "full policy" link at the end of the thread. It's not documented there.

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.
  - ceejayoz 4y ago
    C’mon, you even cited the “with the exception of live location information” bit. That parenthetical says “you can’t share live location information even in a non-abusive fashion”.
    - jjulius 4y ago
      I think that the two of you know a good deal about what is happening with Twitter right now, why these terms are in place, what they actually target and what they don't. And with all that in mind, I'd wager that the two of you are being willfully obtuse here. Edit: Oh, look! Twitter themselves have specifically supported my read of this[1]: >Content that shares location information related to a public engagement or event, such as a concert or political event, is also permitted. [1]https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1603165967453868032 https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1603165967453868032
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
        The fact that this is attempting to specifically target one account is exactly why it's so badly written. It's trying to walk an impossible line of "Elon wants no censorship, but he wants this censored". re: your edit; find that statement in the "full policy" link at the end of the thread. It's not documented there.