Twitter accidentally suspends its own CEO's account

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Nov 23, 2016, 2:51 PM UTC

logicallee wrote: post #17

kintamanimatt wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a suspension, not a deletion, which implies it's possible to resume the account. It seems logical that the state of the account would be entirely preserved for later restoration.

so why does the article report that only 3.8 out of 3.9 million followers were restored? While overall I would say that is pretty much a rounding error, if we look at it very carefully you have to ask: did literally 100,000 people proactively choose to unsubscribe, from an account that obviously remains important, and moreover during a time when it was inactive? Would his tweet have been so 'spammy' that 1 out of 39…

Post by coldpie » Wed, Nov 23, 2016, 2:59 PM UTC

fogleman wrote: post #14

Pigo wrote: post #7

The interview was pretty interesting. Sacca's description of how they make it hard to follow what's going on, even though they know first, sums up why I don't use Twitter. Twitter always feels like I'm walking into the middle of someone else's conversation or inside joke. I rarely have enough context to engage, but people who like to just be loud, or talk to themselves, or don't have a clue can go to town. Maybe I'm…

Back and forth discussions are not the primary use of Twitter. I had a hard time with that for years too before I finally "figured it out." You just need to follow a lot of people who share your interests and then your timeline will become more interesting.

Post by pjc50 » Wed, Nov 23, 2016, 3:05 PM UTC

kevin_b_er wrote: post #19

I wonder if Twitter is susceptible to mass report attacks. I strongly suspect many of these systems just automatically suspend someone for too many reports. This makes it convenient if you don't like someone else's politics to just get a group to mass report them and you can silence whomever you want.

Post by proksoup » Wed, Nov 23, 2016, 3:12 PM UTC

yabatopia wrote: post #26

eternalban wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fitting ... into a tweet. I enjoy the constraint and view it as a minor new art form, similar to the constraints of a Haiku. Seeing that '0' when I'm done is generally mildly pleasurable for me.

Great, but how many people online read, write or enjoy writing Haiku? If writing a Tweet requires as much time and (intellectual) energy as a Haiku, than I'm not surprised that the growth of Twitter is tanking.

Post by Pigo » Wed, Nov 23, 2016, 3:40 PM UTC

fogleman wrote: post #14

Pigo wrote: post #7

The interview was pretty interesting. Sacca's description of how they make it hard to follow what's going on, even though they know first, sums up why I don't use Twitter. Twitter always feels like I'm walking into the middle of someone else's conversation or inside joke. I rarely have enough context to engage, but people who like to just be loud, or talk to themselves, or don't have a clue can go to town. Maybe I'm…

Back and forth discussions are not the primary use of Twitter. I had a hard time with that for years too before I finally "figured it out." You just need to follow a lot of people who share your interests and then your timeline will become more interesting.