Respectfully, Jack, what you're suggesting would be a form of censorship which is counter mission statement of "share ideas and information, instantly, without barriers." Without barriers the key part. This implies it's up to the users to use their best judgement - rightfully so.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A fair statement. If adding a specialised team helps curb things like fake news and harassment, I don’t think anyone on here would complain about that

-
It is getting tougher to experience real time dialogue on here now though. The magic of Twitter has always been the shared experience, and algo showing viral tweets from 8 hours ago, impedes that, imo. Just food for thought.
-
Unfortunately we cannot have dialogue when certain groups hold more authority than others and can report/block a person for asking questions until they are suspended. Journalists block anyone who questions them. 'Harassment' silences opposing voices. Ex:pic.twitter.com/SBtWptkHb3
-
What? She got people banned for replying to her tweet? Let me guess people didn't share her opinion so it must be harrastment right? Couldn't possibly be because she's wrong? Since when have you needed permission to reply to a public tweet??
-
Tweet unavailable
-
That's pathetic! If you need to be so sheltered that you can't even ignore a question asked without reporting it then the internet is not for you! I've never reported a tweet before, is there a choice to report for responding without permission?
-
I can't believe Twitter found what you typed as offensive



pic.twitter.com/c6mzI3qrk1
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Credibility determined by ideologically driven activists? Mainstream orgs with political agendas? Extremely biased groups like SPLC? If you want to control content say so. But why can't you let us decide who to follow, what we see and who we want to promote as credible?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
i think the point was we don't want YOU to do the algos "right". let people do it for themselves, right or wrong. that's the beauty and peril of impartiality
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
What give me “pause” were the “credible” media’s outcry of many so-called “conspiracy theories” that have been consistently proven to be true over the last 12 months ... if theories were labeled illegitimate by your “algorithm” a year ago then the truth would have never come out
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Spoiler alert, it's not. Your algos will just act as gatekeepers for the elite
-
I'm sure you know this.
#WorkingAsIntended
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Believe me, it isn't. Fed up with you messing things around and taking my control away, looking for an alternative already.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Sounds like a little side-step there. You actually DO want to determine credibility, but use a 'blend' of methods to accomplish that same thing. Stop trying to 'varnish' the censorship! You do it. We know you do it. Just admit it and stop the dance....you're not very good at it!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.