
The Twitter Rules - huntermeyer
https://support.twitter.com/articles/18311
======
ericdykstra
Twitter's enforcement of their rules is so arbitrary and selective I wonder
why they even have them. Innocuous accounts get banned over banter, people get
their "Verified" status stripped from them if they say the wrong thing
(shouldn't it just mean "this person is who they say they are"?), and yet
there are accounts with hundreds of thousands of followers that doxx people
and tell their followers to harass them.

It's still a useful platform for now, but they seem to be trying their hardest
to be anti-user.

~~~
tptacek
It does _not_ simply mean "this person is who they say they are" and never
has. Everybody knowledgeable about Twitter (including Twitter themselves) who
makes this claim is gaslighting. Twitter's own documentation explains that the
blue checkmark is reserved for accounts of "public interest". The checkmarks
are displayed prominently in the avatar photo of accounts, rather than simply
as an element of a user's profile.

Verified Twitter accounts are promoted Twitter accounts. Twitter does the blue
checkmark thing as a perk to attract noteworthy people to their platform, and
to draw the attention of ordinary users to those noteworthy people.

~~~
Crontab
> It does not simply mean "this person is who they say they are" and never
> has.

I was under the same impression that OP was, so I looked up the verified
account announcement from the Twitter in 2009[1]:

"To prevent identity confusion, Twitter is experimenting (beta testing) with a
'Verified Account' feature. We're working to establish authenticity with
people who deal with impersonation or identity confusion on a regular basis."

[1]
[https://web.archive.org/web/20090615114316/http://twitter.co...](https://web.archive.org/web/20090615114316/http://twitter.com/help/verified)

~~~
ben1040
Meanwhile when they opened up the application process for anyone to request
verification, they made the implication that a verified account was a "high
quality" account you might want to follow.

[https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/twitter-
announces-a...](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/twitter-announces-
application-process-for-verified-accounts-300300831.html)

>We hope opening up this application process results in more people finding
great, high-quality accounts to follow

This seems to be where the line started blurring between "this is who they say
they are" and "this account is an asset to our platform."

~~~
Crontab
Oh, without a doubt, it has morphed over time. It probably should be called
something else now. But to say it was never about identity is false.

------
rspeer
> Accounts using unauthorized badges as part of their profile photos, header
> photos, display names, [...]

Interesting. Of course there's no way to put an actual badge in your display
name. But this sounds like it's targeted at Julian Assange, who ends his name
with a blue diamond emoji that is reminiscent of a verified badge if you're
not looking closely.

~~~
ceejayoz
I hope they don't act on Assange's blue emoji. It's gloriously petulant (as is
Twitter's refusal to verify the account, in fairness) and deserves to be
preserved.

------
crabasa
> We believe that everyone should have the power to create and share ideas and
> information instantly, without barriers.

I can't wait for this to mean what it used to mean: owning a domain and
putting up a website.

~~~
quotemstr
With registrars being as censorious as they've been lately?

~~~
tehwebguy
How censorious have they been lately?

~~~
patrickaljord
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Stormer#Site_hosting...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Stormer#Site_hosting_issues_after_the_2017_Unite_the_Right_rally)

~~~
tehwebguy
So these 5 or 10 companies don’t want to host this one website.

I guess “Not very censorious” or “Not enough data” is the answer.

~~~
patrickaljord
It's not 5 or 10, every single domain provider have banned them so far. Still
happening today.

------
lightyrs
Twitter's lawyers are probably out celebrating this weekend.

------
YouAreGreat
Even though superficially they are cracking down on every conceivable way of
abusing and harming others, including mere "wishing" for harm, I see _nothing_
about one of their user's favorite pastime: Attempting to cause _economic_
damage to a target, such as loss of customers or loss of job. It's an
interesting omission.

------
sintaxi
What a disaster. Comparing twitter of today to what it once was makes me sad.

