Criminal threats are possible, sure.
-
Twitter is not the state of nature, though. “Publishing a speech act in a way that amplifies it to potentially millions of humans” is hardly the same kind of thing as “not punching me in the throat”, right? Surely we can agree here? Twitter provides an active service.
Yeah, and if they wanted to they could decide to become solely a platform for one political party, or to ban all vegetarians, or whatever. I think it'd be a travesty if they did, but your mileage will vary.
-
-
Actually I'd appreciate the first one, if done openly enough. It would make room for a new player and reduce the power of the platforms quite a bit. Doesn't seem financially responsible for them to do though.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Again, agreed! But in theory, abuse is already banned. In practice, most abuse gets through just fine if it avoids a few keywords. This is not an argument about whether abuse should be banned, it’s about who gets to define abuse, right?
-
Also about which ideas, opinions, criticisms, or other statements are *inherently* abusive
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.