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

X is selling existing users' handles

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 102 posts

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#31

Post by markstos »

bccdee wrote: post #27
arcfour wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe X would take back the account of such an active and valued member of the community who is clearly not squatting on the name or anything.

Squatting is something you do to someone else's property. It implies that there is someone else out there with a more legitimate claim to the @hac handle, which there isn't. It's not as if we're talking about @google or something. If I stole your house and sold it because I didn't think you were using it properly, that would clearly be illegitimate. I don't see why the rules change when we talk about someone's twitte…

X already owned it.

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#32

Post by atmavatar »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #16

It's a drag for sure, but, what were you doing/going to do with it? You almost never posted, and when you did, it didn't contribute to anything. If I owned a site like X, I'd want some way to reclaim user names in cases like these. I don't doubt X is sneaky or gross about it, but it's a reasonable need too. Putting the name on a marketplace is weird. I'd simply free it up if it was my platform, and send a note to the…

> but it's a reasonable need too.

Why?

User names are for all practical purposes infinite: merely allowing 10 character alphanumeric usernames already gets you into the quadrillions, nearly enough for every person on the planet to claim a million unique usernames.

The username in question, while short, doesn't seem to have any inherent value, as it does not appear to be a valid word in any language, and the most common acronym expansion for it (Home Access Center) is too generic to be particularly useful as an identifier such that anyone but the original user would fight for its use.

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#34

Post by idle_zealot »

bccdee wrote: post #27
arcfour wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe X would take back the account of such an active and valued member of the community who is clearly not squatting on the name or anything.

Squatting is something you do to someone else's property. It implies that there is someone else out there with a more legitimate claim to the @hac handle, which there isn't. It's not as if we're talking about @google or something. If I stole your house and sold it because I didn't think you were using it properly, that would clearly be illegitimate. I don't see why the rules change when we talk about someone's twitte…

Since when do you "own" social media handles? Maybe you should, but that's not reflected in the laws of our countries or the policies of these platforms. They own your presence, your content, and your reach. This is our "solution" to self-publishing. Do you want change? Advocate for it.

Of course, if you advocate for a system with no equivalent to eminent domain you'll quickly discover why the rule exists.

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#35

Post by xrd »

My 3 letter handle (xrd) is a cryptocurrency. I get all kinds of @ spam where people shilling a cryptocurrency tag me, assuming I'm associated. I really wish I could move the markets and make a quick buck somehow.

I wish Elon would give me a way to sell it before they steal it.

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#36

Post by dmix »

consumer451 wrote: post #26
dmix wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd imagine the 30 days just the TOS, if they sell a username that has been active (posting, replying) in the past 6 months then it'd be a big deal for sure. It's not clear when OP last used his account but I'd imagine the people doing auctions look to see if they post or interact at all, not just login once in a while. X should probably clarify this.

> if they sell a username that has been active (posting, replying) in the past 6 months then it'd be a big deal for sure. What about this scenario: If you register a domain name, a bot registers a related handle/name/brand pretty quick if you do not. So, you register a twitter handle to preserve your brand identity right after registering a new domain. You don't check it for 6 months. Is it OK for Twitter to sell tha…

If you don't pay for a domain name you could lose it too.

If I signed up for a free social media account hosted by another company and neither logged in or posted on it for a year then it got autodeleted for inactivity, I wouldn't really feel I had a particularly strong claim to it.

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#37

Post by echoangle »

consumer451 wrote: post #26
dmix wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd imagine the 30 days just the TOS, if they sell a username that has been active (posting, replying) in the past 6 months then it'd be a big deal for sure. It's not clear when OP last used his account but I'd imagine the people doing auctions look to see if they post or interact at all, not just login once in a while. X should probably clarify this.

> if they sell a username that has been active (posting, replying) in the past 6 months then it'd be a big deal for sure. What about this scenario: If you register a domain name, a bot registers a related handle/name/brand pretty quick if you do not. So, you register a twitter handle to preserve your brand identity right after registering a new domain. You don't check it for 6 months. Is it OK for Twitter to sell tha…

If your domain is used as a brand identity, you should register it as a trademark and sue anyone who uses your brand identity as a twitter handle.

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#38

Post by quirk »

arcfour wrote: post #24
ronsor wrote: post #3

I think people sitting on a handle for 10-20 years without active use is annoying, so I'm fine with them taking them from dormant accounts. I think the selling is sketchy though.

It's less sketchy than third party underground sites, though, which is the alternative.

Came here to say this.

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#39

Post by imglorp »

ronsor wrote: post #3

I think people sitting on a handle for 10-20 years without active use is annoying, so I'm fine with them taking them from dormant accounts. I think the selling is sketchy though.

Hey it's a revenue stream. I guess it's like selling domain names? Better than more ads maybe? Better than selling your data? Who are we kidding, they'll do all of the above.

Re: X is selling existing users' handles

#40

Post by throwawayq3423 »

xrd wrote: post #35

My 3 letter handle (xrd) is a cryptocurrency. I get all kinds of @ spam where people shilling a cryptocurrency tag me, assuming I'm associated. I really wish I could move the markets and make a quick buck somehow. I wish Elon would give me a way to sell it before they steal it.

> I wish Elon would give me a way to sell it before they steal it.

Just put it online. Maybe use an escrow service. What's stopping you?

Post reply on HN