Twitter Testing out a New Feature

[Jiehfeng]

​

Self explanatory, basically censorship an author of a tweet can tweak to his/her liking so it looks like all the replies to him are goody goody. Twitter isn't as professional as it seems or tries to seem, but this is a new low imo.

You can still view such replies, but such replies won't be in automatic view such as the most liked being at the top, to see replies against the post for example, you would have to look for the show more button, which you have to do for every tweet.

 

[chrisrlink]

wonder if trump had a hand in this probably did damn rat bastard

 

[Jiehfeng]

wonder if trump had a hand in this probably did damn rat bastard

If we're talking individuals, Saudi Prince is more likely as he's the second largest shareholder of Twitter, but I'm not claiming anything I don't know fully, could be Twitter on their own right even.

 

[notimp]

For the record, I think that this is wrong.

(Not surprising anyone here, but hey.. )

 

[Taleweaver]

I've got to admit my first reaction (as a non-twitter user) was "wait...you mean this stuff wasn't already in it?".


Perhaps it's self-explanatory, but I'd still like to know: can FOLLOWERS still see what others reply to the original tweet? In other words: say I tweet something, and person A replies with something I don't like (say...completely proving I don't know what I'm talking about). With this new page, I can put A's reply to another page where I can still see it if I click some "hidden replies" thing.
However...when person B sees my tweet, can (s)he also see A's reply? Meaning: is that "hidden replies" thing equally public?

That's the grand crux. I'm against it if it's not, but to be honest...I don't see the point of the feature if you can't use it to, y'know...censor.

BTW: I'm a member of a different feature that grants such censoring power. One of the fastest ways to destroy your reputation there is by attempting to use it. All it takes is one person to realize their response is being removed. Said person simply states this and takes a screenshot. Once the OP attempts to censor this as well, the said person just uploads the screenshot as picture, and then replies again with the link ("hey...why did you remove my last reply (insert image with last reply) ?"). More often than not, friends pick up on this and join in on the discussion. The end result is usually a thread with one (often almost childish) controversial statement and multiple pages of dumpster fire. Because no matter how much you can censor: you are still one person. In the end, you simply cannot censor faster than people committed to disprove you.

In addition to that: you can't censor an opinion without spending time and attention to it. So I wonder...how long before Trump will give up blocking replies he won't like because there's only a finite amount of time you can devote to twitter censoring?

 

[DBlaze]

Ah wonderful, more snowflake features, gotta keep the web a safe bubble ofcourse.

 

[Viri]

So, they took ideas from that season of South Park? I guess Butters is out of a job, and won't have to worry about detention.

 

[Jiehfeng]

I've got to admit my first reaction (as a non-twitter user) was "wait...you mean this stuff wasn't already in it?".


Perhaps it's self-explanatory, but I'd still like to know: can FOLLOWERS still see what others reply to the original tweet? In other words: say I tweet something, and person A replies with something I don't like (say...completely proving I don't know what I'm talking about). With this new page, I can put A's reply to another page where I can still see it if I click some "hidden replies" thing.
However...when person B sees my tweet, can (s)he also see A's reply? Meaning: is that "hidden replies" thing equally public?

That's the grand crux. I'm against it if it's not, but to be honest...I don't see the point of the feature if you can't use it to, y'know...censor.

BTW: I'm a member of a different feature that grants such censoring power. One of the fastest ways to destroy your reputation there is by attempting to use it. All it takes is one person to realize their response is being removed. Said person simply states this and takes a screenshot. Once the OP attempts to censor this as well, the said person just uploads the screenshot as picture, and then replies again with the link ("hey...why did you remove my last reply (insert image with last reply) ?"). More often than not, friends pick up on this and join in on the discussion. The end result is usually a thread with one (often almost childish) controversial statement and multiple pages of dumpster fire. Because no matter how much you can censor: you are still one person. In the end, you simply cannot censor faster than people committed to disprove you.

In addition to that: you can't censor an opinion without spending time and attention to it. So I wonder...how long before Trump will give up blocking replies he won't like because there's only a finite amount of time you can devote to twitter censoring?

Others still can view the hidden replies by clicking a button, so this is like semi-censoring. It still matters for those quick browsing people, and for first impressions. But in a way, if you think about it, hiding a good reply that others can view would only get you into more trouble like you said.

Well while that makes sense, this is only the beginning of this feature (assuming it gets fully implemented), from there who knows, there could be some sort of system to do this faster/in bulk, or make it automated.

In any case, whether it's full censorship or kinda censorship, I'm against this sort of thing. Recent times have really proven that nowadays people are very oversensitive and we have to deal with this whole "offended" trend that's probably never going to die anytime soon. Makes you think that freedom of speech in reality is just a false gimmick.

 

[WD_GASTER2]

welp. We reached the part where controlled propaganda and echo chambers are a reality in social media almost full throttle, without chance of a rebuttal. (emphasis on almost full throttle)

 

[morvoran]

wonder if trump had a hand in this probably did damn rat bastard

Umm, Republicans are not the ones trying to censor speech they do not like. It is the leftists and leftist run big tech companies trying to block free speech. Talk about fascism!

PS. If you don't love Trump, you don't love anybody. JLP

 

[Mythical]

*tweet tweet*

 

[IncredulousP]

welp. We reached the part where controlled propaganda and echo chambers are a reality in social media almost full throttle, without chance of a rebuttal. (emphasis on almost full throttle)

329,261,657 people like this

 

[Saiyan Lusitano]

Well, not surprised. It is Twitter.

Umm, Republicans are not the ones trying to censor speech they do not like. It is the leftists and leftist run big tech companies trying to block free speech. Talk about fascism!

PS. If you don't love Trump, you don't love anybody. JLP

Not sure if you're actually serious. Hard to tell with this level of seriousness/sarcasm but anyone with a functional brain would know not to fall into the trap of "Left vs Right" as if it's a sport.

 

[morvoran]

Not sure if you're actually serious. Hard to tell with this level of seriousness/sarcasm but anyone with a functional brain would know not to fall into the trap of "Left vs Right" as if it's a sport.

I'm being serious. Not sure what part of what I typed could be misconstrued as sarcasm.

Anybody with a functional, coherent, and logical brain who pays attention to how big tech companies such as Google and Facebook censor/demonitize/delete content of anybody who even has a slight hint of leaning to the right would see that the left has an unfair control over the content we see and hear in the media and on the internet. If this was a sport, then the left is definitely cheating at it.

 

[chrisrlink]

Umm, Republicans are not the ones trying to censor speech they do not like. It is the leftists and leftist run big tech companies trying to block free speech. Talk about fascism!

PS. If you don't love Trump, you don't love anybody. JLP

lol you got me i want ww3 and the human race purged from existance

 

[morvoran]

lol you got me i want ww3 and the human race purged from existance

I'm not saying you are one, but what you said is similar to what some antifa members want. They create chaos just so they can watch the world burn.

 

[notimp]

The off topic rant was actually on topic?

Without the rant.

Atifa is employing violence against public property as a political strategy - so with an end to the means in mind. Not just "to watch the world burn".

There are forms of protest that arent 'non violent' - usually they arent advisable or needed in democratic systems, but political theory in the fifties argued a conceptual ruleset that also thought about those forms of protest.

Fast forward, fast forward, Monks burning themselves on the streets.

(In joke regarding what was deleted here. )

On the topic:

The ability to self censor your 'private reality' should lead to people defending themselves more in bubbles where as interacting with protest/counter speech would serve to have people discuss issues more openly. When people start to 'censor their realities happy', the issues they are dealing with arent going away.

Censorship opportunities for everyone (not just mods who at least operate on a peers checked model, with potential escalation options, and arent partial) - are just serving to make social media even more of an advertising friendly space - and thats exactly not whats needed. I'm very, very sure of that.

But since the chinese are now blocking out people with a bad social score from societal opportunities, like traveling - everyone in the west is giddy to replicate. (Overdrawn, but thats exactly the dynamic thats currently in play.)

 

[notimp]

There are instances where 'I've blocked your messages' is advisable - but those usually are in the realm of stalking/bullying/public denunciation.

I'm not talking about those.

If you have that problem - and as a social media company cant do anything about it structurally, because it doesnt scale - I think you (the social media company) are the problem. And if you now try to hand off that responsibility to every individual that broadcasts - you've destroyed even more of societies balancing mechanisms.

 

[arcanine]

This idea that people should be able to control how conversations develop is reflective of a big social problem. I won’t have a conversation under those circumstances. Either accept that I will say what I want how I want to say it, or fuck off.

 

[Deleted User]

Umm, Republicans are not the ones trying to censor speech they do not like. It is the leftists and leftist run big tech companies trying to block free speech. Talk about fascism!

The people who didn't get fucked in high school having a power fantasy in their adulthood to metaphorically fuck everyone else, color me surprised. The funniest thing is these people are so unoriginal and adept at thievery (I do not care if it's for the greater good, there is nothing stopping them from volunteering if they care so god damn much) they even steal our arguments (Businesses should be allowed to decide who to serve, not the government) yet if you ask them to apply the same principal consistently (Bake the gay cake for example) they lose their shit from the cognitive dissonance.

I don't bother arguing with these types of people, it's just easier to shower them in dank memes as they have already made up their mind and believe everyone to the right of Jane Fonda is an evil NAHTZEE!