Maggie's dashboard

I'm moving to GoPingMe already as I have no choice. But if I had a choice... I'd stay with Sandy. As it is, I feel like a renter who's been thrown out in the middle of their lease when the landlord suddenly decides to build condos.

It seems to me that all this just says that either
A) Twitter is killing IWS outright. End of story. As hard as this might be to believe, we've heard nothing to the contrary. And they are, after all, shutting down the service abruptly with no real message to 'hang in there'. We're being told to find alternatives. That's pretty final sounding.
or
B) They will eventually add this sort of functionality into Twitter. Again, we've had no word or assurance that this will happen (much less a rough timeframe). So... Option A is actually far more likely, based on the evidence.

Even if B is the case, two things will have happened by then. We'll have moved to someone else's product and you'll have to woo us back AND then you'll have to listen to us (and the new users to come who'll know nothing of IWS) demand features we've come to rely on at these other services. All the while, we were perfectly happy with Sandy.

Either way, IWS -- an already great product -- is, instead of steadily growing and refining, ruined. I wish Rael the best, but I just can't help feel that this is a shitty thing to do to your user base (I'm speaking of both both IWS and Twitter).

No, we're disagreeing on "obligated". Which they are. – Maggie, on May 23, 2008 07:39

"2. Twitter is not *obligated* to enforce its TOS. It's their TOS, and it gives them a bunch of rights. They choose if they use them."

I'm afraid that's incorrect. Their TOS is a form of contract made between them and the user at the time of signup. Both sides are bound by its terms (Twitter does reserve the right to change the TOS and modify the contract at any time, a reserved right spelled out in the TOS, but they have not done so). A TOS is 'this is what we agree to do, this is what you agree to do'. – Maggie, on May 23, 2008 06:59

Look... I love Twitter... but frankly this whole thing makes me nervous. Let's even just put Ariel's specific problems aside for a second. What bothers me and many others is this:


"Twitter is a communication utility, not a mediator of content."

Well, then why does Twitter cover mediation in its TOS? Why is that not specifically removed from your TOS as it certainly creates exposure for you in an area that at least two of you have stated you do not wish to provide easy general remedy? Leaving it in to CYOA is trying to have your cake and eat it too... except that, if you dilute your duty to enforce the TOS, your abandonment may also dilute your indemnification... and your users' requirement to _abide_ by the TOS.

If you both had not said anything, you'd actually be in a better position. But twice we've heard from Twitter that you are not simply just of differing opinion about Ariel's case, but are also generally reluctant to mediate at all (despite the TOS).

You (Twitter) are saying here, in effect, 'we don't want to mediate, but we would prefer to keep the mediation language in our TOS because other people have it in theirs.' So now your users are bound by it but you, according to the above, are not necessarily (or only very loosely). I, and I'm sure your lawyers, can tell you which would hold up in if this were before a judge. That sounds almost comical, but considering the legislation currently being considered after the whole Megan Meier mess, it's not so far-fetched anymore. One teenager's home address posted by a stalker in which you were notified of prior incidents but did nothing could blow up like... well, something very messy and full of splat.

Not that we want to see that happen. Far from it. We come not bearing pitchforks, but pleadings.

We, the people in here complaining, are actually on your side. Imagine what this would be like in a room full of people who were not?

All we're asking here is for Twitter to step up and be VEYR clear. And if you need to revise your TOS, we'd VERY much like you to get on that straight away and let us know you're serious about this. You don't need me to tell you that, between this and the ongoing performance issues your user base could become very fragile very quickly. None of us want this to blow up any further than it already has. – Maggie, on May 23, 2008 04:11

I disagree with the notion that Twitter has recognized the issue and "apologized" on their way to fixing it. The only 'sorry' has been 'sorry you thought we'd abide by the terms you signed up under'. And their recognition has been along the lines of 'we interpret that text differently [than you and the other services we borrowed it from] and don't care to discuss it any further'.

PS - debutaunt, I believe Ev's tweet was in regards to a different issue (scaling and armchair programmers giving advice pulled straight out of their bums).