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

Twitter Should Shut Me Down

edu.mkrecny.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–219 of 219 posts

Re: Twitter Should Shut Me Down

#211

Post by mindcrime »

rxantos wrote: post #210
mindcrime wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could imagine a lot of things. I'm just trying to point out that you can't just absolve individuals from being responsible for the outcomes of their decisions. And that's not the same thing as saying "The victim was dumb, they got what they had coming to them".

Bad judgement on one individual doesn't justify bad actions of another individual. A woman might choose to wear clothes that make her look sexy. But that doesn't justify a guy raping her. I agree that people act dumb. But that doesn't justify predatory behaviour.

A woman might choose to wear clothes that make her look sexy. But that doesn't justify a guy raping her.

Nobody said it did, and that example is nothing like what we're talking about here.

Re: Twitter Should Shut Me Down

#212

Post by bradleyjoyce »

MartinCron wrote: post #204
bradleyjoyce wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say any rationalization would be exactly like the rationalization a spammer would make. Who's spamming and who is not? I would argue that the way we're doing this is not spam, as it is clear the people we favorite are getting value by virtue of the fact that they are following us, registering for our service, etc.

Some serious questions: What percentage of people who you auto-favorite follow you back and/or register for your service? What threshold do you consider appropriate. Do you have any visibility into the people who are annoyed by seeing your robot interaction in a place that they feel should be reserved for human interactions? How would you feel if every single service provider interested in finding you were to favorit…

> What percentage of people who you auto-favorite follow you back and/or register for your service? What threshold do you consider appropriate.

It is greater than 50%. As I said, we do this in an extremely targeted way. We may only favorite 10 tweets in a day because the targeting we do is so specific. To be honest, I haven't thought about any particular threshold being appropriate/not.

> Do you have any visibility into the people who are annoyed by seeing your robot interaction in a place that they feel should be reserved for human interactions?

No, but I think you already knew that. This question sounds like your projecting your personal feelings quite a bit.

> How would you feel if every single service provider interested in finding you were to favorite all of your tweets to get your attention?

Personally, I wouldn't even notice it. I have all notifications turned off for that type of stuff. If anything, they'd be giving me more exposure to the people who may look at their account/favorites.

Re: Twitter Should Shut Me Down

#213

Post by bradleyjoyce »

waylonflinn wrote: post #205
MartinCron wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some serious questions: What percentage of people who you auto-favorite follow you back and/or register for your service? What threshold do you consider appropriate. Do you have any visibility into the people who are annoyed by seeing your robot interaction in a place that they feel should be reserved for human interactions? How would you feel if every single service provider interested in finding you were to favorit…

I'd like to tweak your final question (with the assumption that this sort of thing could, someday, provide value). "How would you feel if every single service provider you were interested in finding were to favorite all of your tweets to get your attention." I'm not suggesting that the technology is there yet, but the future is a big place.

The technology is already there. This is, to a degree, what we do at Socialyzer.

We analyze your social audience (location, activity, tweet content, etc) and use that information to predict when and where you should engage with them.

We don't take it to any automated action other than publishing your content, but it's possible to do.

Re: Twitter Should Shut Me Down

#214

Post by icedchai »

So specifically what "Terms of Service" is he violating? I looked through it and couldn't find anything specific that addresses automated "favoriting". There was some vague stuff about spam.

Re: Twitter Should Shut Me Down

#216

Post by ec109695 »

abductee wrote: post #52

you don't need more vms to get around their rate limit, you just need to query their api using a clientside language like javascript, that way the ip twitter gets is the ip of the user, not your servers. The company I work at has awesome search, so I have a tool which grabs tweets from individual user's streams (if a customer has an issue with my product and tweets about it I like to search their public twitter strea…

What about cross domain restrictions?

Re: Twitter Should Shut Me Down

#218

Post by ComputerScience »

The "plea for public support" blog post is getting old and frankly immature.

You knew Twitter's TOS & you broke them. That's okay if you're willing to put up with the business risk that--if you gain scale--Twitter may be forced to buy you (eBay/Paypal, Photobucket/Myspace) or at least work with you.

That said, your service as others acknowledge below is akin to spamming. This is not a service that is for the betterment of Twitter users AND advertisers. It merely betters your company's coiffeurs and advertisers who are getting "a deal."

You want to win Twitter over? Make it painfully obvious to customers what is occurring. Disclose your business metrics. Put out case studies that show how both users AND advertisers benefit.

The appeal for public support/disclosure is old hat.

Re: Twitter Should Shut Me Down

#219

Post by Guvante »

mootothemax wrote: post #49
Guvante wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The fact that they're not even charging $20/month for minimal API access is baffling to me. The devs who experiment and make something cool are often worth more than the minimal charge. However I would agree that rather than having arbitrary limits using devs as a revenue stream makes sense (give everyone a portion of what you currently allow and allow payed upgrades)

give everyone a portion of what you currently allow and allow payed upgrades Exactly - there are plenty of options available. The devs who experiment and make something cool are often worth more than the minimal charge. I'm just wondering how many such developers would be put off by such a relatively small charge? Obviously, the situation now is very different to when Twitter was still building momentum. I'm just con…

Making someone make a purchase decision to play around with your platform blocks some people from ever using your platform. You don't need to let everyone play for free, but allowing say 1,000 requests a month at no cost would get some extra people to try out your platform.
Post reply on HN