One of the things that made Twitter a great brand is that end users got to kind of invent a little bit of the brand whenever they promoted their Twitter accounts on their sites and other places. It encouraged creativity that eventually extended to what the users posted on the service.
Why bow to the gods of uniformity after half a decade of freedom? With the reach of their network and the level of influence they've built, don't they have something better to spend their time on?
Of course, I know literally nothing about the laws in question and could be off base entirely.
For what it's worth, I've certainly seen documents like this from other companies. Based on these observations (rather than the actual law :/), I think that what they're doing is part of protecting it from dilution.
Result: many Twitter birds beak-planting into the ground and farting in surprise.
Now spam rotate. :)
Epileptic Psychedelic dance party!
Uh, like bootstrap.js? :)
In this case, you are simply wrong about the application of "the fold", though. The point is, this is a simple web page containing a link and an application. The application is large enough that it cannot be reasonably guessed to live in the top 400-500 pixels of the screen. So there should have been a visual cue to distinguish the application, perhaps a box around it, so that people who have not yet seen the buttons at the bottom will scroll down and see them. Right now you have no idea where the application resides, and that is the complaint.
Edit: the scroll bar is also shown briefly when the page finishes loading.
Do you have a lot of toolbars on your browser or something? Huge font size?
Are there actually any higher-end phones or tablets made by anyone other than Apple that don't support flash? I'm genuinely curious since I love to play on kongregate.com during commutes.
In a generation or two, flash may indeed be "legacy" for mobile browser clients. That has absolutely nothing to do with the rest of the web market or the "mobile in general doesn't support flash" claim, which is verifiably false.
As the majority of mobile devices in users' hands today do not support Flash, it is indeed fair to say "mobile in general doesn't support Flash". Again, that's the definition of "in general".
someone at twitter must have had to much time at his (or her) hands.
I know Twitter recently changed (standardized) their logo but how is this site relevant?