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

An account was suspended

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 398 posts

Re: An account was suspended

#211

Post by lapcat »

jorams wrote: post #200
Semaphor wrote: post #25

He goes into detail: > It’s the “after careful review” line that has me riled up tbh. I can understand why an automated system suspended it. Don’t lie to me! -- https://twitter.com/benthompson/status/1583063313948499969 And yeah, I have to agree. I absolutely hate it when providers (shipping companies are great at this) tell me obvious lies. Hey, I can handle issues and problems. What I can’t handle are lies.

Looking at the account, I don't see why it would be a lie in this case, or why the account shouldn't have been suspended after manual review. It posted 75 tweets in 26 minutes, self-admittedly "from multiple locations around the world.". All of those tweets link to an external website. It's spam, so the account got suspended for posting spam. The fact that it was posted by Ben Thompson doesn't change the fact that it…

Would you say https://twitter.com/daringfireball or https://twitter.com/thetalkshow are spam? Should they be suspended too?

The account did not violate Twitter rules in any way. It wasn't sending replies. It wasn't retweeting other accounts. It wasn't liking other accounts. It wasn't interacting with other accounts in any way. Should there be no accounts on Twitter that have a list of episodes of a program?

People follow these accounts because they want to be notified of new episodes. It's not spam, it's a service.

I tweet links to my blog posts on my Twitter account. Should I be suspended? What's wrong with external links?

Re: An account was suspended

#213

Post by pessimizer »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #38
capableweb wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was only so easy. If you're running a business, you most likely need to meet people where they are at. Sometimes, your target audience are mostly on Facebook, then you most likely need to be at Facebook in order to reach them. Sometimes they are on Twitter, then you need to be there. Other times, you're doing something completely different, like running a restaurant, then you need to be visible on Google Maps/T…

> Sometimes they are on Twitter, then you need to be there. Wow, that's a depressing thought. I think I'd prefer to find a different line of business, if it were me.

> I think I'd prefer to find a different line of business, if it were me.

It's almost every line of business. You probably need a mildly active twitter/facebook/instagram presence if you have a nice nail salon, or toy store. Anything not in a huge popular franchise.

edit: this sentiment puts me in mind of a watch or shoe repair shop guy in the 1960s who refuses to install a telephone because he wouldn't want customers who think that they could just loudly barge into whatever he was doing at will. Telephone culture brings a sense of unearned entitlement that attracts bad people. But you miss out on business worth far more than the irritation without a telephone. Keep the telephone outside the actual shop and hire someone else to answer it. They used to call answering machines "phone butlers."

Re: An account was suspended

#214

Post by jobs_throwaway »

jorams wrote: post #200
Semaphor wrote: post #25

He goes into detail: > It’s the “after careful review” line that has me riled up tbh. I can understand why an automated system suspended it. Don’t lie to me! -- https://twitter.com/benthompson/status/1583063313948499969 And yeah, I have to agree. I absolutely hate it when providers (shipping companies are great at this) tell me obvious lies. Hey, I can handle issues and problems. What I can’t handle are lies.

Looking at the account, I don't see why it would be a lie in this case, or why the account shouldn't have been suspended after manual review. It posted 75 tweets in 26 minutes, self-admittedly "from multiple locations around the world.". All of those tweets link to an external website. It's spam, so the account got suspended for posting spam. The fact that it was posted by Ben Thompson doesn't change the fact that it…

what's your definition of spam? Are lots of links inherently spam?

Re: An account was suspended

#215

Post by rchaud »

rossdavidh wrote: post #129

So, this all falls under the category heading of "this private company's product or service is now too important to have it denied for arbitrary or unclear reasons". This is, in fact, not a new problem; we even have a word for this kind of good or service: "utility". There was a time when phone service, electricity, etc. was just an ordinary private company that you contracted with, who could do whatever private comp…

So Twitter would be treated like PBS?

I'd love the see the faces of those 'free speech absolutists' if that ended up happening. If they thought Twitter censors too much now...

Re: An account was suspended

#216

Post by orblivion »

lapcat wrote: post #179

As a longtime Twitter user, I personally feel that the Twitter spam problem is vastly overstated. I'm not talking about the total amount of spam, I'm talking about its effect on individual users. I occasionally get spam replies, but not very often. I just block the account, problem solved. I don't feel it affects my overall Twitter experience much. In fact, I'm vastly more annoyed by real humans who reply to me with…

I basically stopped tweeting in May. I sent like 2 or 3 this summer. Since then I've started getting a bunch of crypto spam DMs.

Though maybe they're looking for dead accounts to phish and break into?

Re: An account was suspended

#217

Post by lapcat »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #206
lapcat wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> bot rings that push topics in trending I have a browser extension that hides trending topics, so I don't see that at all. > tweets that end up in your time line for example I just said that I use the reverse chronological timeline that only shows tweets from my follows. > Or voting bots that reinforce the outrage culture. "I'm vastly more annoyed by real humans who reply to me with insults." > read any elo musk twe…

So what your saying is that if you use twitter in a certain way, bots won't affect you much. I agree, and I do the same as you. But driving in a certain way to avoid pot holes should not be a good reason to avoid fixing the road.

> So what your saying is that if you use twitter in a certain way, bots won't affect you luch.

No, I'm saying that I doubt spam has much of an effect on the experience of most Twitter users. Email spam is probably much worse for most people.

[EDIT:]

1. I never mentioned ad blocking, so I'm not sure why 2 replies mentioned it. I mentioned blocking trends.

2. Even if you have trends, even if you have the algorithmic timeline, I think the replies greatly overestimate the effect of bots and spam on those. You don't see bot spam in the algorithmic timeline either. I also think "outrage culture" is mostly human culture, and we have plenty of genuine outrage even without any bots.

3. Even if you think (which I don't) that bots greatly affect the timeline and the trends, deemphasizing bot-like accounts in the timeline and trends is an alternative to suspending accounts. There's much less harm in algorithm adjustment than there is an account suspension, because false positive suspensions are very harmful to the account holder.

Re: An account was suspended

#218

Post by rchaud »

lapcat wrote: post #211
jorams wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the account, I don't see why it would be a lie in this case, or why the account shouldn't have been suspended after manual review. It posted 75 tweets in 26 minutes, self-admittedly "from multiple locations around the world.". All of those tweets link to an external website. It's spam, so the account got suspended for posting spam. The fact that it was posted by Ben Thompson doesn't change the fact that it…

Would you say https://twitter.com/daringfireball or https://twitter.com/thetalkshow are spam? Should they be suspended too? The account did not violate Twitter rules in any way. It wasn't sending replies. It wasn't retweeting other accounts. It wasn't liking other accounts. It wasn't interacting with other accounts in any way. Should there be no accounts on Twitter that have a list of episodes of a program? People fo…

The account in question posted 76 tweets in under 30 mins.

Have you posted with this level of frequency, from different IPs? You may not need to worry if you have not.

Re: An account was suspended

#219

Post by pwdisswordfish9 »

itsamoreh wrote: post #68
_madmax_ wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point in time I think I am comfortable saying the web is more detrimental to humans than Television ever was.

"Television is more detrimental to humans than telephone ever was." "Telephone is more detrimental to humans than radio ever was." "Radio is more detrimental to humans than telegraph ever was."

What if it is, but you can’t tell any more, because you don’t know how the world looked without it?

Re: An account was suspended

#220

Post by jobs_throwaway »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #39
Semaphor wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that he goes into detail why he is so pissed: > It’s the “after careful review” line that has me riled up tbh. I can understand why an automated system suspended it. Don’t lie to me! -- https://nitter.kavin.rocks/benthompson/status/15830633139484...

Honest question: why would the account in question not be suspended after review by a human? It's a new account that posted 75 tweets in less than 20 minutes, all linking to the same website, and with high-profile names in the title of the tweets. This looks like spam to me, I would have banned it too.

>This looks like spam to me, I would have banned it too.

Why? Is a list of episodes inherently spam? What definition are you using?

I certainly wouldn't have banned this account

Post reply on HN