Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search


(17,671 posts)
98. What, exactly, do you want fixed?
Sat Aug 10, 2013, 12:38 PM
Aug 2013

There is already a process for reporting threatening tweets. What does an alert button do that this form does not? If the objective is to apprehend and prosecute the malefactor, absolutely nothing. In fact, without a certain amount of information, there is no chance whatsoever that justice will be served at all. Unless the aggrieved party plays an active role in the prosecution, this alert button will work exactly like the alert link on DU, which is to say it will do nothing more than hide the offending tweet from their sight. It is probably possible for the programmers at Twitter to see to it that when the alert button is clicked, information about the offending tweet is already entered into the appropriate fields. But the user still has to play at least some active part in apprehending the malefactor. Do you really think that simply clicking a link on a website could or should be enough to send someone to jail?

Again, what does the button do that the form does not? It makes reporting easier. It is a convenience for the user. It does absolutely nothing to help apprehend and prosecute the malefactor. And what are the implications of this added convenience?

Well, for starters there are millions of fools out there who consider a threat to their overblown ego the same as a threat to their person and hurt feelings as tragic as a broken leg. For them the lure of a simple mouse click to exact revenge will be too great to resist. They can cry wolf with even greater impunity than they no doubt already do. The terrible form is a part of the investigative process to determine if the threat is real. That process begins when someone is actually frightened enough to fill in seven information fields and click seven radio buttons. Oh, the horror.

Add to those vindictive egomaniacs the legions of pranksters, false flags, social dominators, and all the other permutations of internet foolishness and the system, which still has to rely on the same basic form to function, will be front loaded with camouflage for whatever idiot is stupid enough to give their victim advance warning of their intent. Efficiency for the user will result in inefficiency for the system. The net result is reduced benefit for those who are threatened online. But there are some who will benefit more.

A few people, namely public figures and those who desire to be so, may get hundreds of threatening messages at a time from as many different people. Increased reporting efficiency will no doubt help them - a little bit. Although I would think that the necessity of filling out a short form for each instance would be considered part of the price one has to pay for making their living in the public eye. But personal convenience is not the greatest benefit for those enterprising souls.

This absurd tempest in a teapot regarding the graphic design on bank notes is little more than a lever for profit driven notoriety at the expense of Twitter. At the very least, these people can attract attention to themselves as advocates for justice with little capital investment. In fact, they can use the very system they are lambasting as the conduit for their accusations. It's disaster capitalism at its finest. And, if they're lucky, they will get their button. And that magical button of justice will become a reminder of those shamans ability to give you a voice. It will become a mini advertisement, courtesy of Twitter, of how they helped you every time you log on to broadcast your advertising laden and data mined one hundred and forty characters.

So an alteration of code from an overworked underpaid programmer, a small change in the EULA just to be safe, and you will get the feeling of security where there is none. Twitter will make money. Professional bloviators will make money. Internet service providers will make money. And you will get nothing more than you already have, which ain't much. And that's how the 1% wins.

Very interesting LeftishBrit Aug 2013 #1
grace the 10 pound bill ? dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #2
And, there it is. Sheldon Cooper Aug 2013 #3
All that was actually necessary dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #5
They deserved it don't you know. Attention seeking w*o*e boston bean Aug 2013 #6
Your post exposes you as a sexist totally willing to do what the OP is pointing out albeit KittyWampus Aug 2013 #26
I've seen the argument, right here on DU, that this is a free speech issue boston bean Aug 2013 #4
Its not a free speech issue dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #7
I know women should self censor themselves and avoid places boston bean Aug 2013 #8
Where have I heard that logic before ... In_The_Wind Aug 2013 #30
The only precaution I've taken is an androgynous name Warpy Aug 2013 #81
Wow. I am guessing you design and market burkas for a living, right? Squinch Aug 2013 #12
That is an offensive remark directed at a specific religion. dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #15
Nope. It's directed at a piece of clothing that is designed to make women anonymous and Squinch Aug 2013 #16
Nice try. dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #17
Nope. It doesn't. But if you choose to see it that way, and you are offended, you can just Squinch Aug 2013 #18
You finally agree dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #19
Bye. Your advice was bad, but at least you follow it. Squinch Aug 2013 #21
Hehe. Saw that one coming. n/t Decoy of Fenris Aug 2013 #22
And are you in agreement with the poster's argument that, in response to the rape Squinch Aug 2013 #23
Yup. Fully. Decoy of Fenris Aug 2013 #25
How about child porn? Does that qualify for free speech protection in the Squinch Aug 2013 #47
Not at all, given that child porn is hardly "Speech". Decoy of Fenris Aug 2013 #61
So, if you see something that YOU find objectionable, it's OK to take a stand against it. Squinch Aug 2013 #62
That's not what I said at all, but I'm wagering you knew that and are spinning rapidly. Decoy of Fenris Aug 2013 #63
There is a conflict here, in this thread. Watchya doing still participating? boston bean Aug 2013 #65
I've been debating leaving the thread alone, but that would result in further conflict. Decoy of Fenris Aug 2013 #69
So you can stay around and discuss, but the woman who got death and rape threats shouldn't. Squinch Aug 2013 #71
Speaking of making it simple, let's review our conversation: Squinch Aug 2013 #66
They have the -right- to strike back; they -should- remove themselves. Decoy of Fenris Aug 2013 #67
There you go again.... Squinch Aug 2013 #68
Yes, damn my consistency and all that. Do you have a point you're attempting to make? n/t Decoy of Fenris Aug 2013 #70
You are consistently inconsistent. It is a rare talent. Squinch Aug 2013 #72
And, that marks the end of that. Decoy of Fenris Aug 2013 #74
Actually all sides of the discourse! But have a good night. Squinch Aug 2013 #78
It's aimed at a small group of of men who abuse and oppress women Marrah_G Aug 2013 #20
Burqas have nothing to do with religion. They are a cultural artifact and nothing more. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #27
It is a free speech issue. If women can't get on facebook or twitter or any other site Arcanetrance Aug 2013 #24
You're exactly right. Just Saying Aug 2013 #80
Harassment and threats of violence aren't "free speech" gollygee Aug 2013 #41
Same exact answer here nadinbrzezinski Aug 2013 #38
yeah,that didn't escape me. boston bean Aug 2013 #42
Did you see the female circumcision as a matter of "choice" BainsBane Aug 2013 #73
No, missed that. But I have seen a bunch of sick thinking boston bean Aug 2013 #75
Troll does not equal troll. redgreenandblue Aug 2013 #9
Funny you should mention witch hunting. ananda Aug 2013 #10
Absolutely. Squinch Aug 2013 #13
No. Tricksters. Igel Aug 2013 #11
nice. feminists and supporters of women boston bean Aug 2013 #14
It is really unbelievable how deep sexism is even on DU. KittyWampus Aug 2013 #28
I am beginning to think there are some here who are totally sick with it, and Squinch Aug 2013 #48
I don't question that many are liberal guys… but it's so deeply ingrained in societal attitudes KittyWampus Aug 2013 #53
I think the posession of those attitudes means that they can't be considered liberal. Squinch Aug 2013 #55
That's been obvious to me. boston bean Aug 2013 #64
I think death threats etc are illegal, are they not? rrneck Aug 2013 #29
Yes it was a matter for the police here dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #31
Good. But then a Labout MP would expect such a response. rrneck Aug 2013 #35
She was one of two. dipsydoodle Aug 2013 #37
not allow people threatening rape and violence to use their service. boston bean Aug 2013 #32
400 Million tweets a day. How many moderators do you think that will take? rrneck Aug 2013 #33
That is what an abuse button is for boston bean Aug 2013 #34
Yes, we all know what the alert abuse button is for. rrneck Aug 2013 #39
A death threat is easy to recognize boston bean Aug 2013 #40
Soooooo..... rrneck Aug 2013 #43
Twitter will decide. boston bean Aug 2013 #44
Well, rrneck Aug 2013 #45
Didn't we have this exact same discussion, and run into the same "but, but, but"s Squinch Aug 2013 #49
He acts like I didn't answer him. Twitter will decide boston bean Aug 2013 #50
Or, to them the issue is that what women are "complaining about" Squinch Aug 2013 #51
women do not deserve a mechanism to report boston bean Aug 2013 #52
What assurances do you offer that any significant selection of men out of the millions of Tweets a Squinch Aug 2013 #54
None. rrneck Aug 2013 #58
"If you desire something surely you would give some consideration as to how your desires will be Squinch Aug 2013 #60
MUST it? rrneck Aug 2013 #79
Why don't you explain how you plan to keep people from making death threats and rape threats Squinch Aug 2013 #83
I don't have one. rrneck Aug 2013 #86
There is more to activism than just pulling the word "patriarchy" out of your ass and thinking Squinch Aug 2013 #89
There oughta be a law! rrneck Aug 2013 #91
Glad you've seen the light. Squinch Aug 2013 #92
Oh now. rrneck Aug 2013 #93
I'm not. Twitter is. And I have no doubt they will find a way if motivated by profit. Squinch Aug 2013 #94
You see, that's what I'm talking about. rrneck Aug 2013 #95
You see, this is where you just don't get it. Squinch Aug 2013 #97
What, exactly, do you want fixed? rrneck Aug 2013 #98
Pfffft. Bloviate on and have a nice day. Squinch Aug 2013 #99
You hadn't given the issue any real thought at all, had you? rrneck Aug 2013 #100
I didn't actually read your manifesto there. Don't plan to. So no, I'm not giving it any thought. Squinch Aug 2013 #101
There are non so blind as those who will not see. rrneck Aug 2013 #102
Didn't read this one either. Squinch Aug 2013 #104
But you answered it. rrneck Aug 2013 #105
Oh, look, I'm still not reading your posts. I could do this all day. Squinch Aug 2013 #106
As could I. rrneck Aug 2013 #107
I'm sorry, did you say something? Squinch Aug 2013 #108
Yes. nt rrneck Aug 2013 #109
Great to see you stand up for human rights again BainsBane Aug 2013 #76
Never mind a solution? rrneck Aug 2013 #82
Yes, it's very clear the importance you place on the lives of women BainsBane Aug 2013 #85
Where's that solution? nt rrneck Aug 2013 #87
WTF are you talking about? BainsBane Aug 2013 #88
See post #82. ntt rrneck Aug 2013 #90
They are not only creepy, they often travel in packs usGovOwesUs3Trillion Aug 2013 #36
One DUer posted about helping a homeless person outside a bank... Octafish Aug 2013 #46
I'm not going to have the word skills d_r Aug 2013 #56
I've noticed a link between gun nuts and sexism/misogyny... boston bean Aug 2013 #59
It's not absolute at all BainsBane Aug 2013 #77
There is nothing you can do about internet trolls LittleBlue Aug 2013 #57
They need identity verified sites. napoleon_in_rags Aug 2013 #84
GIFT Prophet 451 Aug 2013 #96
Digital hate, although unpleasant and unfair, is not stoning nor water dunking. It does, however, valerief Aug 2013 #103
Now I know why women can’t have nice things mercuryblues Aug 2013 #110
Part of the problem is that when "trolls" get banned, they make up a new name & sign up again Warren DeMontague Aug 2013 #111
yes. mercuryblues Aug 2013 #112
Im not suggesting twitter shouldnt put an alert button in there, of course Warren DeMontague Aug 2013 #113
Aren't those just masterpieces of projection? Squinch Aug 2013 #114
yes it has been mercuryblues Aug 2013 #115
Facebook figured it out. Twitter will too. Squinch Aug 2013 #116
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are Internet Trolls the M...»Reply #98