3 ms·

> We are sorry to say that the app’s sudden and undignified demise is due to an unannounced and undocumented policy change by an increasingly capricious Twitter

> We are sorry to say that the app’s sudden and undignified demise is due to an unannounced and undocumented policy change by an increasingly capricious Twitter – a Twitter that we no longer recognize as trustworthy nor want to work with any longer I understand that many people are angry about recent Twitter changes. This rightly so, because many 3rd party apps are obviously a huge time investment and people have bought apps. This seems unjust. However, with all the recent disclosures about Twitter shadowbanning, deboosting, deamplifying, banning, and viewpoint censoring, I cannot help but feel that Twitter has always been capricious. It is only now that we are recognizing it : the unfortunate reality that a private company controls a defacto public square.

dusing 4y ago
You’d have to agree that the current owners are “controlling the defacto public square” a magnitude less than the previous ones. I don’t think asking a tiny % of twitter users to use their products interfaces instead of third parties is very controlling, but shadow banning, and censoring topics is incredibly.
- OrvalWintermute 4y ago
  > You’d have to agree that the current owners are “controlling the defacto public square” a magnitude less than the previous ones. I think they are both controlling, but yes, the current regime appears much more viewpoint neutral. > I don’t think asking a tiny % of twitter users to use their products interfaces instead of third parties is very controlling, but shadow banning, and censoring topics is incredibly. Disagree here, because tools are built upon this. So, it might be more accurate to say Twitter 3rd party Devs & Twitter Ecosystem Devs, not users. I think the viewpoint controlling and censoring is more so; HN does some of the same things I am afraid to see (yes, to a much smaller audience, but same tactics).

dusing 4y ago

You’d have to agree that the current owners are “controlling the defacto public square” a magnitude less than the previous ones. I don’t think asking a tiny % of twitter users to use their products interfaces instead of third parties is very controlling, but shadow banning, and censoring topics is incredibly.

OrvalWintermute 4y ago
> You’d have to agree that the current owners are “controlling the defacto public square” a magnitude less than the previous ones. I think they are both controlling, but yes, the current regime appears much more viewpoint neutral. > I don’t think asking a tiny % of twitter users to use their products interfaces instead of third parties is very controlling, but shadow banning, and censoring topics is incredibly. Disagree here, because tools are built upon this. So, it might be more accurate to say Twitter 3rd party Devs & Twitter Ecosystem Devs, not users. I think the viewpoint controlling and censoring is more so; HN does some of the same things I am afraid to see (yes, to a much smaller audience, but same tactics).