2 ms·

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 th

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
  >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". Yup! That's why I even mentioned that it was clearly hastily written in an earlier comment. For what it's worth, I think I share your sentiment, re: Musk/freedom of speech. It's hastily written because it's reactionary and, assuming Musk/Twitter can ever actually get their house in order, I'd anticipate that it will be more clearly written into the terms over time. But in spite of it not being written clearly... >re: your edit; find that statement in the "full policy" link at the end of the thread. It's not documented there. ... I've still managed to demonstrate in this comment chain that I was able to understand the intent of the poorly-written "full policy" link, based on my assertion yesterday followed by the confirmation Tweet that I shared this morning. And I'm fairly certain you did, too. This comment chain is feeling incredibly cyclical, so I'm gonna bounce.

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
>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". Yup! That's why I even mentioned that it was clearly hastily written in an earlier comment. For what it's worth, I think I share your sentiment, re: Musk/freedom of speech. It's hastily written because it's reactionary and, assuming Musk/Twitter can ever actually get their house in order, I'd anticipate that it will be more clearly written into the terms over time. But in spite of it not being written clearly... >re: your edit; find that statement in the "full policy" link at the end of the thread. It's not documented there. ... I've still managed to demonstrate in this comment chain that I was able to understand the intent of the poorly-written "full policy" link, based on my assertion yesterday followed by the confirmation Tweet that I shared this morning. And I'm fairly certain you did, too. This comment chain is feeling incredibly cyclical, so I'm gonna bounce.