Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

Post by progbits » Sun, Dec 18, 2022, 10:29 PM UTC

surteen wrote: post #640

est31 wrote: post #108

When MS bought github many people moved to gitlab and started to advertise their gitlab IDs. I too put my gitlab in there. But ultimately, gitlab didn't catch on on a permanent basis: most devs still are on github, thanks to network effects. People removed their gitlab mentions. I feel the same with the "find me on mastodon" twitter bios: people will realize that only 50 of their thousands of followers can be found o…

This Twitter drama is strikingly similar to Freenode. A rich guy bought it, people started moving to Libera.chat in small numbers and advertising their new channel on Freenode in the topic. There wasn't a huge exodus, though. Then this new owner started taking over channels and kicking everyone out that had mention of a Libera.chat channel in its topic, forcing everyone to move all at once. I haven't heard of anyone…

Post by gtaylor » Sun, Dec 18, 2022, 10:38 PM UTC

seydor wrote: post #313

troydavis wrote: post #49

(from another thread) Any attorneys want to weigh in on whether - or when - this becomes an anti-competitive/anti-trust concern, either in the US (FTC) or the EU? Related reading: * Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) Article 102, on abusive conduct by companies that have a dominant position in a market: https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/antitrust/procedures... . Any EU resident can file a co…

aren't they a private company anyway? To claim that they have a dominant position is very ovestated. Twitter is no bigger than reddit.

Post by wfaler » Sun, Dec 18, 2022, 10:39 PM UTC

alasdair_ wrote: post #481

wfaler wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure he lied. I think he fooled himself into thinking that moderating a social media platform can be done on a rose-tinted ideological basis. Then reality hit, and the fact is, there are so many edge-cases that being ideologically consistent is almost impossible. Moderation is hard. And it matters, both to keep audiences & advertisers. Besides, First Amendment-based moderation is not even possible for an internat…

>Thailand & the UK have laws banning speech offensive to their royal families. The UK may technically have some old law on the books stating this but it's never enforced. I mean, the Sex Pistols ("God save the queen... A fascist regime...") demonstrated this quite convincingly. I did hear about someone getting arrested for yelling at Prince Andrew in a funeral procession, but that was for breach of the peace during a…

Post by djcannabiz » Sun, Dec 18, 2022, 10:43 PM UTC

323 wrote: post #567

jacquesm wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very interesting, thank you. To what degree is it decentralized?

Recommended by Jack too: https://nitter.it/jack/status/1603945963944480768

Post by dredmorbius » Sun, Dec 18, 2022, 10:57 PM UTC

mytailorisrich wrote: post #204

jamespwilliams wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes they are and they explicitly say as much: > we will remove any free promotion of prohibited 3rd-party social media platforms, such as linking out (i.e. using URLs) to any of the below platforms on Twitter Your quote is referring to cross-posting from other sites to Twitter, not linking.

Still, the way this is drafted I don't interpret it as banning every single type of links but rather promotion of your profile of your content on another platform. It's not as explicit to me as you suggest. I guess we shall see soon enough.