Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

blog.twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 373 posts

Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

#201

Post by tobylane »

rubyist5eva wrote: post #189
foobiter wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

marjorie taylor green requires more detail than simply “a republican congresswoman” - she’s blamed forest fires on jewish space lasers, among other racist, homophobic, and transphobic conspiracy theories

She is still an elected member of congress, and from what I hear - a rather popular one, regardless of her "tinfoil hatery". Opposition parties should _never_ have the power to just expel people they don't like from the opposing side. I'm sure it's purely coincidence she is locked from her twitter account on the same day that congress will be voting on a resolution on whether or not to expel her.

> Article 1, Section 5, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution addresses the question of what is required to expel a person from Congress. It states: “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.”

If it’s in the constitution, especially if the founding fathers put it in, it can become popular with Americans.

Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

#202

Post by dv_dt »

BoorishBears wrote: post #192
dv_dt wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I disagree there. Though there are negative effects, one positive effect is that Twitter creates an opportunity for direct public feedback being seen by world leaders vs official channels that insulate from that feedback to a much higher degree. Though I do say "opportunity" because obviously leaders can create organizational insulators to Twitter accounts just as with any other channel.

What feedback? Does anyone think Donald Trump ever actually read those one-line zingers random celebs would reply to his tweets with? Do people think some dictator is going to ignore the people they're oppressing but listen to @xx69destroyerman calling them out?

Not all opportunities are exercised - but especially on HN I would think we should realize that it's significant that they exist.

But your comment also brings up a possible secondary benefit: the benefit of the people to see and possibly get in contact with other real people (real for the most part hopefully), as they criticize world figures. This is something that doesn't exist in other media outlets or exists only for people who can afford to take time out to go to a protest or in person official function.

Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

#203

Post by mberning »

Mighty fine of them to start caring about this months after the US election. They are run by transparent political operatives but the media constantly runs air cover for them. 50 years ago the media would be investigating the inner workings of Twitter with a microscope.

Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

#204

Post by nonotreally »

jtdev wrote: post #190
nonotreally wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if it's a private company? Hackernews famously moderates their comment section, to the benefit of all. Why can't this happen on Twitter?

Twitter/HN is not an apples/apples comparison... but sure, Twitter is completely within their _current_ lawful rights to moderate and censor whatever content they want. But I would posit that they are actually causing more harm than good through these efforts, and they've now firmly placed themselves in a total quagmire in doing so.

That is a really good point - HN is much smaller and attracts a very different audience.

I agree, they have created a really unfortunate situation for us and for them.

In principal, forgetting the practicalities, would you support HN style moderation on Twitter/FB?

My gut reaction is yes. It seems to be a good balance of gut check and "we don't have time for this".

o/t

5 star online conversation dude.

Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

#205

Post by matz1 »

matthewmacleod wrote: post #59

I have quite literally no idea what the correct answer is, and I reckon anyone who claims to have an easy answer is lying, because the landscape is fundamentally different to anything we've seen before. Twitter is both a public forum and a private enterprise. The decisions it makes—not just in terms of moderation, but in terms of structure and incentive—substantially affect the spread of mis/disinformation. Is it the…

There is no correct answer. There is only answer that you want and what you can do is to fight for your answer to become the outcome.

That being said I prefer twitter to be as hands off as possible when dealing with this.

Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

#208

Post by protomyth »

teraflop wrote: post #117
protomyth wrote: post #111

Twitter is incapable of doing any judgements where the leaders / office holders of any country are concerned. If people want to follow a leader, let them. If they are incapable of handling what they see then that's on them. They are leaders of countries, not some Instagram star.

> Twitter is incapable of doing any judgements where the leaders / office holders of any country are concerned. What do you mean by this? Surely Twitter is capable of making judgments and enforcing its rules accordingly, just like Burger King can require the president to pay for his meals. Are you saying Twitter should decline to enforce any rules against world leaders?

They allow anti-semantic comments from some leaders and censor others over opinions that they don't support but haven't violated any actual reading of the rules. They have demonstrated that they cannot figure this problem out. So, since they cannot do it in an objective or fair way, they should not do it at all. People can follow or not follow. Elected leaders have always been a special case.

Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

#209

Post by steve76 »

There is no moral equivalence. Public consensus means nothing. Laws still restrain people no matter how many people agree. The purpose of laws, in regards to humans? Limit the violence, not create it.

Here's an idea. How about not betraying the people paying for your bailouts. You could at least hire more people.

Isn't Karl Marx the one European who has enslaved more people than anyone? Wealth doesn't accumulate. What once was novel, like electricity, becomes ubiquitous. And you can't "rich" yourself out of society. If you are moral and behave, you accumulate wealth, and often give it away before your lazy spoiled children ruin you.

And the dialectical materialism, didn't Marx misread Hegel? Thesis, antithesis, synthesis. Hegel never said that. What Hegel said is if you choose an "-ism", the very real world proves it wrong, and that's how you get ideals.

The communist plague the world. OK. We'll just advance medicine. The communist bribe and loan our leaders? OK. We'll just take the money from them, and throw them in the ocean when the loan comes due.

Anything else?

Re: Calling for public input on our approach to world leaders

#210

Post by skybrian »

jefftk wrote: post #193
glitchc wrote: post #169

World leaders should not have a forum on Twitter. We have official government channels for that, where other stakeholders in the system provide their input before the message becomes public. If an individual moves into the position of a world leader or equivalent, their account should be frozen until such time that the position ends. This is the only sane policy. Anything else is too dangerous for humanity. Twitter a…

It sounds like you're proposing something where some politicians can participate in discourse on Twitter but not their slightly more successful rivals?

A line needs to be drawn somewhere, but it could become a prestige thing to be too big for Twitter. (Also, in practice, their press secretary would be on Twitter and say things for them.)
Post reply on HN