This isn't a problem. Find a real one and fix it.
Does anyone other than twitter really give that much of a shit about twitter?
Online harassment—especially of marginalized groups like women and people of color—is absolutely a real problem.
I live in America. I can say whatever I want. And I would like to keep it that way.
Everyone certainly should have the right to say whatever they want. It doesn't mean anyone else should have to listen.
Your rights end where everyone else's rights begin. You can say whatever you want up to the point where you affect others.
No they actually don't. I can affect others with my words. As long as it's not harassment. 1st amendment.
The concept above encroaches on American's civil liberties.
Muting someone on Twitter is hardly a violation of civil liberties. And there are plenty of other countries accessing Twitter besides the USA, so speaking only of American liberties/law is a moot point.
Thanks Kemie. I don't care.
Now, if there was a muting button for DN... ;)
Online harassment is a very real and serious problem. And it does not just concern women and people of color, it concerns people of all shapes and shades. Online Space needs not to be exclusive, but inclusive. The same goes for all other areas, where marginalized people are being treated differently. This solution would only make it worse, but saying that this isn't a problem, is a bit ignorant.
We've come full-circle. Southpark S19E05
If I can jump in here: we obviously get that this is a sensitive issue, and understand how it could elicit negative reactions, but I'd like to ask that you don't just immediately dismiss this as PC-policing — that's not the idea. We are of course not interested in restricting freedom of speech whatsoever, but rather seeking to take a stand against on-line harassment and hate speech, both of which have long been considered criminal offences in most developed nations and are, in fact, against Twitter's existing ToS.
Anyone's who's been on the receiving end of on-line harassment knows it's no joke. It can destroy lives — and I say this with the heavy heart of knowing there's no metaphor nor hyperbole there. That is, in part, the reason why we all tolerate the existence of a little link called "Guidelines" on the footer of this very page.
In Twitter's case, we understand it's up to them to try to enforce these rules. That's why we're not trying to erect a content firewall on the client-side, but rather taking advantage of Twitter's existing solutions for content-blocking to ensure everyone who opts-in to the service doesn't have to face (as much) racism, hate speech and harassment just to exercise their own right to freedom of expression.
I get the general purpose. Harassment is a real problem, but this won't solve it. In reality, most internet users consider a "troll" to be someone who just doesn't agree with them. Also, the phrase "hate speech" is thrown around pretty loosely and often ends up just meaning....yet again....someone who just doesn't agree with you.
The internet is already becoming a self-validating echo chamber by virtue of the fact that everybody chooses to follow only the people they already agree with. Let's not make it even more close-minded.
I mean, you can look at the list of people they blacklisted, and about 95% of the ones I saw have the n-word or neo-naziism in their bio, so I think they have a pretty reasonable definition.
So explain to me why you need a special service to prevent neo-nazi tweets from showing up in your feed?
I don't know about you, but I've chosen not to follow anybody who would retweet content from @Nazi4life69.
The accounts they've listed as blacklisted in their test run have an average of 20ish followers . If anything, this service has just given these crazies an even BIGGER voice by legitimizing them as significant enough to blacklist.
I just get the feeling this project is a bunch of opportunistic dudes trying to make money off of the social justice warrior zeitgeist the internet is on right now.
I think this is a noble thing—online harassment is absolutely a real issue that needs to be addressed—but here's what concerns me:
We need both time and money.
This problem has been tackled before, by people who are victims of online harassment, for people who are victims of online harassment, often without any sort of organized funding. For example, Good Game Auto Blocker, a block tool by Randi Harper to combat harassment from GamerGate trolls, is funded entirely through PayPal and Patreon.
I'm only going off the people on your company's website, so I'm sorry in advance if I'm wrong or out of line here. My worry is that this project—developed by a group of people who are by and large not systematically victims of online harassment—will profit from that harassment while little money and recognition will go toward similar efforts from those commonly victimized.
Again, I believe you have entirely good intentions here. But given that groups such as women and people of color are not only much more likely to be harassed online but also much less likely to receive any sort of funding for their work, please consider that it might do more good to draw attention and funding to their existing efforts than to enter this fray yourselves.
Fair point, Jake. I can certainly empathize with your concerns over a group of white men asking for help campaigning against on-line harassment. However, I think if you try to look beyond that initial friction, you'll see that we are neither proposing to build this on our own, nor are we suggesting that we intend to profit from it at all. This has been the hardest point to get across — that we are not really putting out a product or a service, but rather a proof-of-concept of a tool we think could be useful, not just for victims of harassment, but also for organisations working to fight it (who we are, as you can see from the article, inviting to join us on this endeavour).
This is fucking stupid
We must police ideas! Wrongthink is too dangerous!
I'm so sick and tired of this "Everyone should think and act the way I think people should think and act" mentality.
Probably a bunch of libs
this is my favorite comment of all time.
You're a bunch of heteronormative white dudes and I'm trolling you
Oh, then you are doing great, please carry on.
So only homosexual and pansexual non-white biological women who don't identify as "women" are allowed to talk about trolls? Oddly discriminatory.
heterosexual white men would be the first to say they don't see a real problem with trolling
Prob voting 4 Bernie lol.
What are you implying?
That you're a lib.
Well, then you're an asshole.
This seems like a great service, but there's no indication how they build their troll list. I think that information is critical for building trust in the product.
But: good to see folks working on this!
As many people already pointed out... you are trying to objectively solve a subjective problem. People need to decide for themselves, who to block and who not to block. I would probably block people who devote their existence to jesus in their twitter profile. Not because I don't respect their religious beliefs, but because as a gay man I need to save myself from people who could potentially harm me. But because block them, doesn't mean that another person needs to block them. And, it also doesn't mean that I don't tolerate their beliefs.
You are proposing the exact opposite of what we need. We don't need even more blocks. We need RESPECT each others values, so that we see that all of as are flawed humans and we all can hurt each other but can also decide not to. We can live alongside each other with other views and values. Don't subscribe to someone elses value! What you are proposing, does exactly that.
I am a feminist but I also see that there are people not understanding this subject on all sides. I am gay but I am also spiritual. I am from Austria, but I am not xenophobic and I see myself as a European, not an Austrian. I am a Vegetarian but I will not try to tell not to eat meat. I am a designer but I don't listen to the same music as everyone else does. I am gay but I am not overly obsessed with looks.
I am not subscribing to your values but I respect yours. It would be great, if you had the same respect for my values, but my respect is not conditioned on yours and will not change if you see things differently.
Are you talking about the type of PC racists that ruined Justine Sacco's life and then laughed about it? Or is that an acceptable form of bigotry and harassment because it's done in the name of "equality", "diversity", and "inclusion"?
"we’ll make sure that you don’t have to meet the worst trolls"
Please save me from meeting them!
How are you defining "bad accounts"?