Recent activity
Subscribe to this feed
Alysson replied on August 29, 2008 02:49 to the question "What are some good ways to use stikkit with iwantsandy?" in I want Sandy:
mdy replied on August 04, 2008 04:20 to the problem "Random adds by porn sites." in Twitter:
Hello. Not sure if this will be any consolation, but Twitter *does* remove spammers that are reported via http://twitter.com/help.
From what I can tell, Twitter has already removed 15 of these porn_website accounts. And I expect that they'll take action against the remaining ones within a day or two.
ayjay replied on August 03, 2008 23:57 to the problem "Random adds by porn sites." in Twitter:
ayjay started following the problem "Random adds by porn sites." in Twitter.
norbiq replied on June 26, 2008 23:23 to the question "Why is Sandy free? Are you selling my shopping list to marketeers?" in I want Sandy:
Elizabeth Wiley replied on June 26, 2008 21:40 to the question "Why is Sandy free? Are you selling my shopping list to marketeers?" in I want Sandy:
jayfresh replied on June 18, 2008 16:41 to the question "Has stikkit been abandonded?" in I want Sandy:
Noah David Simon @TheAnalysis replied on June 11, 2008 10:47 to the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
Ariel works for Pounce? now I get what is going on.. ... yeah she blocked me on my first day ever using twitter. she isn't nice. I could see why a stalker would want a piece of her. Motive with a capital "M"... she is probably telling the truth. I was angered enough by her behavior to spiral out of control. I think it is time we start blaming the victim... just a bit. come on people. bring out the inner "Nelson" is all of us and go "HA HA"
spongefile replied on June 06, 2008 20:31 to the problem "My Jottit page seems to be down." in Jottit:
spongefile started following the problem "My Jottit page seems to be down." in Jottit.
A comment on the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
Carter: I am confused as to how your Web site relates to this conversation. Is there something I am missing? – Eric Suesz, on June 05, 2008 21:10
A comment on the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
HARASSMENT she is saying I can't read and probably secretly thinking the typical European comment "Stupid American." Thats basically racism! BAN! Oh and did I mention I started a website? <a href="http://www.whatisitmadeof.com">www.whatisitmadeof.com</a> BOO-YAH! – Carter, on June 05, 2008 15:47
A comment on the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
Well then, I stand corrected. Biz lied about his business practices and Twitter will be flooded with people calling each other vulgar names and ads for penis enlargement. Guess it's time to close my account now before that happens. Everyone move to Pownce. They block spammers and stalkers better than Twitter. Sorry to be so sarcastic about this, but I still don't see the major issue here. If Biz lied and didn't follow his own companies' ToS, then shame on him. But all of this for one person? C'mon. And I don't care that she disclosed the fact that she works for Pownce AND that all of this happened BEFORE she worked at Pownce, that's now a factor hanging in the balance. Seriously, I hope Twitter does respond better, but it sounds like no matter what Twitter/Biz does here, it will never be good enough for the users. Meanwhile, the true slippery slope that will happen will be censored comments from every person who was stalked, offended, called a "cunt", etc etc... Twitter will be reacting more to answering to complainers than they will fixing their network. It will be down more than up.... wait a minute... if they are down, people can't send threatening or vulgar tweets to others. Problem solved. Move to Pownce. – martymankins, on June 04, 2008 20:50
A comment on the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
People who actually *read* what this is about don't see conflict of interest because this started long before Ariel was an employee of Pownce. – Marjolein Katsma, on June 04, 2008 18:09
A comment on the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
Marty, the first account was apparently closed before they even could do something - we'll have to accept that statement because we can't verify it. The second account (confession) they said was closed before they could check it -- which was either just blatantly "saying something" without /actually/ looking if they could check, or simply a blatant lie, because it was up there with very obvious "libelous, defamatory, obscene or otherwise objectionable" content that many of us have seen long after Biz stated the account was closed and they could not check it. It was not /actually/ removed until I complained about that both here and on the Twitter blog. I'm sorry, but such a blatant lie, or simple neglect to even check whether such content is still on their server for all to see (and archive on other websites!), is not something that fits in my definition of "responding professionally". THAT behavior is the slippery slope that will make Twitter a spammers' haven and a free-for-all platform to spew objectionable (etc.) content -- unless such behavior is amended soon, and visibly, very clearly. – Marjolein Katsma, on June 04, 2008 18:06
A comment on the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
Marjolein, if Twitter had done absolutely nothing, then I could see your point. But since they responded professionally (just not to Ariel's satisfaction), your ending statement is simply a slippery slope. – martymankins, on June 04, 2008 15:07
Carter replied on June 03, 2008 23:35 to the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
A comment on the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
They do, however qualify as "libelous, defamatory, obscene or otherwise objectionable" - all of those, in fact - quote from the TOS. (Yes, and I have read the part that says "We may, but have no obligation to, remove Content and accounts containing..."). The fact that the TOS is already weak on "Spam" (they apparently haven't realised there are many other types of spam than email spam - and that capitalization is hilarious) and their "sole discretion" in this case is to do nothing at all, is sending a powerful message that anything goes at Twitter. Keep it up, and Twitter will become a spammers' haven and a free-for-all platform to spew "unlawful, offensive, threatening, libelous, defamatory, obscene or otherwise objectionable" content. Keep that up for a little more and there won't be any scaling problems left. – Marjolein Katsma, on June 03, 2008 05:15
michaelcrook replied on June 02, 2008 22:01 to the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
I have to side with Twitter on this. Ariel is not being stalked or threatened. This is nothing more than a thin-skinned little girl who can't handle a little name-calling. Although the names are crude and rude, they do not qualify as cyberbullying or harassment.
Twitter would have been well within its right to tell her to take a flying leap, but they humored her, and that speaks well for them.
http://www.michaelcrook.net/2008/06/0...
A comment on the problem "Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service" in Twitter:
Point taken. I think the line between "harassment" and someone being a jerk is blurred here, which is why this is such a contentious issue. – Bonsmots, on June 01, 2008 19:44
| next » « previous |
Loading Profile...








