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

Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

thenextweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 352 posts

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#321

Post by diogenescynic »

brandonmenc wrote: post #153
diogenescynic wrote: post #19

I'll definitely not be flying United or Delta ever again after this incident. Over-selling spaces on a plane is a scummy practice and shokldn't be allowed. When someone needs to cancel they still pocket the change fee or keep tne entire fee if they miss the flight. Seems like borderline fraud.

> Over-selling spaces on a plane is a scummy practice and shokldn't be allowed. Without overbooking, you'd switch to complaining about thousand dollar domestic flights.

That's completely bullshit. Flights would be a few bucks more expensive at most, not thousands.

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#322

Post by diogenescynic »

Spooky23 wrote: post #55
diogenescynic wrote: post #19

I'll definitely not be flying United or Delta ever again after this incident. Over-selling spaces on a plane is a scummy practice and shokldn't be allowed. When someone needs to cancel they still pocket the change fee or keep tne entire fee if they miss the flight. Seems like borderline fraud.

Complain to your congressperson. These sorts of problems are directly caused by deregulation. But be cautious, the benefit of allowing this sort of bullshit has been dramatically lower fares.

>dramatically lower fares.

Bullshit. Jetblue doesn't oversell and they aren't dramatically more expensive [1]. I think you're just believing what they want you to think. At most people are saving a couple dollars a flight.

1: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-02-05/jetblue-n...

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#323

Post by self-diversity »

cmurf wrote: post #312
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand correctly, odor is in fact one explicitly-stated valid reason for being removed from an aircraft. (Not at 42,000 feet, of course.)

Yes, for United it's contract of carriage rule 21, H, reason 16: malodorous condition. It's funny that this is under the auspices of safety though. I guess the logic is if someone stinks enough it might cause disorderly conduct by other passengers?

Imagine being locked next to someone who smells of their last trip to the bathroom after a taco bell binge for five hours. How much vomit might you conjure up for the crew to enjoy?

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#324

Post by wu-ikkyu »

root_axis wrote: post #316
wu-ikkyu wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>nobody is forced to use it Social conformity is far more subtly persuasive than outright violence in this day and age. "Choosing" to opt out of corporate ownership is equivalent to a de facto excommunication from society.

> "Choosing" to opt out of corporate ownership is equivalent to a de facto excommunication from society. Not using twitter isn't an excommunication from society, that's absurd hyperbole that might be a sign you're living in a bubble. I don't use twitter, most people I know don't use it, I'm willing to bet most people on this forum don't use it, which is all totally anecdotal, but the effect size is massive.

>Not using twitter isn't an excommunication from society

Obviously not, which is why I said "opt[ing] out of corporate ownership" which includes but is not limited to Twitter, Facebook, Google, Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, Microsoft, Apple, Elsevier, etc.

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#325

Post by red_hairing »

hdhsbshs wrote: post #180
danso wrote: post #142

Surprised that people here are taking this at face value. Why would Twitter remove these tweets from random users while leaving the vast majority of negative tweets in place? No proof has been given. Indeed, this Jay Beecher's allegedly deleted tweet is visible as far as I can tell: https://mobile.twitter.com/dancow/status/851808188567388161 edit: To be fair, Beecher says that my tweet refers to tweets he sent out af…

My tweet from last night is gone. It's not "alleged".

they also deleted my tweet from this morning, which simply made fun of united airlines ("we seat you, then we beat you! Board as a doctor, leave as a patient! #NewUnitedAirlinesMottos")

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#326

Post by red_hairing »

red_hairing wrote: post #325
hdhsbshs wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My tweet from last night is gone. It's not "alleged".

they also deleted my tweet from this morning, which simply made fun of united airlines ("we seat you, then we beat you! Board as a doctor, leave as a patient! #NewUnitedAirlinesMottos")

UAL may be paying twitter and reddit to stifle the fun

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#327

Post by [deleted] »

tylerjd wrote: post #260
jacquesm wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They claimed it was overbooked but that has not been substantiated with any evidence other than the company making that claim and using it to pre-empt those passengers in favor of their dead-headers. The proof that they are bullshitting is that the passengers were already on board when suddenly the plane was declared overbooked. Which to me sounds like UA using an excuse to bump passengers off a flight they are alrea…

That's exactly what they did. Someone up the chain made a mistake. Other airlines board must-ride passengers (i.e. crew deadheading to the next destination) before passengers, but this did not happen. Due to FAA regulations, the movement and sleep requirements of crew is enforced big time. In this case, they had a higher priority than a full-fare passenger (Must Ride), and even though it's morally wrong, it is well w…

[deleted]

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#328

Post by snowwrestler »

mrdrozdov wrote: post #285
danso wrote: post #142

Surprised that people here are taking this at face value. Why would Twitter remove these tweets from random users while leaving the vast majority of negative tweets in place? No proof has been given. Indeed, this Jay Beecher's allegedly deleted tweet is visible as far as I can tell: https://mobile.twitter.com/dancow/status/851808188567388161 edit: To be fair, Beecher says that my tweet refers to tweets he sent out af…

From TNW. Seems relevant: Update 2, April 11, 11:15ET: Some readers have suggested that the allegedly deleted tweets might have initially appeared as replies to now-deleted tweets, which would explain why they are missing. However, numerous users contacted by TNW rejected this premise, claiming the missing posts were standard tweets.

TBF it's harder to tell when your tweet is being posted as a reply than it used to be, because of the changes in the Twitter mobile app UI for replies. Since the change I have accidentally posted tweets as replies a couple times.

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#329

Post by cmurf »

tylerjd wrote: post #318
cmurf wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"airline's right to remove any passenger at any time for any reason" 1. Absurd. Flight attendant: Sir, you farted, we're going to remove you. Passenger: Umm, we're at 42,000 feet?! Flight attendant: Too bad, we can remove you at any time for any reason. 2. Citation for this "right"? In the airline's contract of carriage I see explicit reasons for being removed from an aircraft, and none of them apply to this case.

Essentially, the Captains word is law while on the plane. He is responsible for the safety of everyone on board. According to FAA FAR 91.3, a. The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft. Additionally ICAO code states The pilot-in-command of an aircraft shall have final authority as to the disposition of the aircraft while in comman…

Nope. Not applicable at all, the aircraft was not in operation. I am a pilot (former CFII) and and there is no possible application of this FAR to this situation. It's not even a stretch.

Re: Twitter allegedly deleting negative tweets about United Airlines incident

#330

Post by eli_gottlieb »

cmdrfred wrote: post #107
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well of course. Who was enough of a sucker to believe that the means of education, information distribution, and public discourse should be privately owned and operated for profit?

So much better if the media was owned and controlled by the government?

No, by journalists!
Post reply on HN