Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   After nearly 16 years in operation, Twitter finally decides it might be a good idea to ban doxxing and revenge porn   (blog.twitter.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Abuse, Twitter, private information policy, Psychological abuse, private media, public figures, Human rights, part of our ongoing efforts  
•       •       •

2517 clicks; posted to Main » and STEM » on 30 Nov 2021 at 12:05 PM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



98 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-11-30 9:12:38 AM  
Jack leaves and the new rules come out?

Coincidence?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2021-11-30 11:23:57 AM  
Twitter banned doxxing and revenge porn long ago.  The new rule allows the subject of a photograph to complain about its sharing even when it isn't hot or even sexy: "this update will allow us to take action on media that is shared without any explicit abusive content, provided it's posted without the consent of the person depicted."  After the complaint (by the subject or a representative) the Twitter mod team will be asked to judge if the person is a private or public figure; whether the person is a woman or minority; whether the newsworthiness value exceeds the harassment harm; whether the tweet "adds value to the public discourse"; and whether the tweet is "relevant to the community."

When some girl posts a fully clothed picture of her ex, comment "this is relevant to my interests" if you want it to stay.
 
2021-11-30 12:08:03 PM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2021-11-30 12:12:15 PM  

70Ford: [i.imgur.com image 498x479]


son of a.....
 
2021-11-30 12:12:32 PM  
"adds value to the public discourse" seems like an exceedingly high bar to get over for most Twitter content.
 
2021-11-30 12:13:35 PM  
So they're not going to require that you give them your phone number anymore?
 
2021-11-30 12:13:57 PM  
How long until powerful people regularly start claiming to have been "doxxed" by the sharing of widely disseminated public information?

JK Rowling complained that protestors doxxed her by posting pictures that had her home address in them, but her home literally has its own wikipedia page.
 
2021-11-30 12:14:16 PM  
It's so cops can demand that the video of them abusing power be taken down.
 
2021-11-30 12:14:24 PM  
I'm mildly annoyed that they ended the independent clause leading up to the list of private information you can't share in a preposition.
 
2021-11-30 12:16:57 PM  
If the person is nothing more than an average everyday person then if the Twitter post is used maliciously I don't think it should matter what sex, race, or ethnicity that the person/people are. And even if it is public person if what is being posted is intended to cause harm then there better be a damned valid reason to allow it.
 
2021-11-30 12:18:50 PM  
So, Twitter is now deciding to crack down on the kinds of activities that helped the FBI identify 1/6 terrorists. Cool.
 
2021-11-30 12:19:31 PM  

Nuclear Monk: "adds value to the public discourse" seems like an exceedingly high bar to get over for most Twitter content.


Didn't say good value.
 
2021-11-30 12:20:05 PM  

SavageWombat: It's so cops can demand that the video of them abusing power be taken down.


That was already going on
 
2021-11-30 12:22:12 PM  

Nuclear Monk: "adds value to the public discourse" seems like an exceedingly high bar to get over for most Twitter content.


Another way of saying "Allows us to monetize"
 
2021-11-30 12:23:22 PM  
Monty Python - Oh you're no fun anymore
Youtube S6mlQu83XTQ
 
2021-11-30 12:23:29 PM  

ZAZ: Twitter banned doxxing and revenge porn long ago.  The new rule allows the subject of a photograph to complain about its sharing even when it isn't hot or even sexy: "this update will allow us to take action on media that is shared without any explicit abusive content, provided it's posted without the consent of the person depicted."  After the complaint (by the subject or a representative) the Twitter mod team will be asked to judge if the person is a private or public figure; whether the person is a woman or minority; whether the newsworthiness value exceeds the harassment harm; whether the tweet "adds value to the public discourse"; and whether the tweet is "relevant to the community."

When some girl posts a fully clothed picture of her ex, comment "this is relevant to my interests" if you want it to stay.


Doxxing us white guys is okay, I guess.
 
2021-11-30 12:24:33 PM  

JessieL: How long until powerful people regularly start claiming to have been "doxxed" by the sharing of widely disseminated public information?

JK Rowling complained that protestors doxxed her by posting pictures that had her home address in them, but her home literally has its own wikipedia page.


Drew has to regularly cover his arse over that kind of stuff. You will have your post removed if you post someone's phone number/address on here, even if it exists on the website the article is linked to, or openly on said person public webpage.

Basically, everyone in charge of stuff knows how lazy and clickbaity people are. Reading TFA? I gotta make a comment. And reposting the information just feeds the mob who weren't going to go much beyond death threats in the thread/message board. Like placing a palletof bricks in the middle of the street right before a protest. You are baiting people to misbehave.
 
2021-11-30 12:26:10 PM  
media of private individuals without the permission of the person(s) depicted

Why do I get the feeling this will lead to unintended (or maybe completely intended?) consequences such as videos of Karens, protests, police violence, etc being pulled from the platform?
 
2021-11-30 12:28:52 PM  

apoptotic: media of private individuals without the permission of the person(s) depicted

Why do I get the feeling this will lead to unintended (or maybe completely intended?) consequences such as videos of Karens, protests, police violence, etc being pulled from the platform?


Or just pulling videos by claiming any police officer was undercover as private security. And no longer in a public service. Wink. Wink.
 
2021-11-30 12:31:28 PM  
I have managed to go all of those 16 years without ever once thinking:

I need to get this on Twitter!

or Let's see what Twitter has to say!

Just because it's a newish idea using newish technology that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

/off my lawn please
 
2021-11-30 12:32:05 PM  

AppleOptionEsc: JessieL: How long until powerful people regularly start claiming to have been "doxxed" by the sharing of widely disseminated public information?

JK Rowling complained that protestors doxxed her by posting pictures that had her home address in them, but her home literally has its own wikipedia page.

Drew has to regularly cover his arse over that kind of stuff. You will have your post removed if you post someone's phone number/address on here, even if it exists on the website the article is linked to, or openly on said person public webpage.



Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-11-30 12:33:04 PM  

AppleOptionEsc: JessieL: How long until powerful people regularly start claiming to have been "doxxed" by the sharing of widely disseminated public information?

JK Rowling complained that protestors doxxed her by posting pictures that had her home address in them, but her home literally has its own wikipedia page.

Drew has to regularly cover his arse over that kind of stuff. You will have your post removed if you post someone's phone number/address on here, even if it exists on the website the article is linked to, or openly on said person public webpage.

Basically, everyone in charge of stuff knows how lazy and clickbaity people are. Reading TFA? I gotta make a comment. And reposting the information just feeds the mob who weren't going to go much beyond death threats in the thread/message board. Like placing a palletof bricks in the middle of the street right before a protest. You are baiting people to misbehave.


Please don't perpetuate that line of bullshiat.

https://www.adl.org/disinformation-suspicious-piles-of-bricks
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-are-photos-random-piles-bricks-kenosha-genuine-1650751
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/06/bricks-were-placed-for-construction-not-to-incite-protesters/

You've inadvertently made a good point about how so much of the structure of social media protects the powerful and further disempowers the weak though.
 
2021-11-30 12:42:36 PM  
If Twitter gets rid of all the assholes, what will the remaining 4 people talk about?
 
2021-11-30 12:44:11 PM  

Tonto's Expanding Headband: I have managed to go all of those 16 years without ever once thinking:

I need to get this on Twitter!

or Let's see what Twitter has to say!

Just because it's a newish idea using newish technology that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

/off my lawn please


OK Boomer. Don't you have a cloud to yell at?
 
2021-11-30 12:44:23 PM  

Tonto's Expanding Headband: I have managed to go all of those 16 years without ever once thinking:

I need to get this on Twitter!

or Let's see what Twitter has to say!

Just because it's a newish idea using newish technology that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

/off my lawn please


The amount of news and information that originated from Twitter alone tells me you don't think past your little "holier than thou" attitude.

The Arab Spring was driven and reported almost completely by Twitter.
 
2021-11-30 12:45:06 PM  

JessieL: AppleOptionEsc: JessieL: How long until powerful people regularly start claiming to have been "doxxed" by the sharing of widely disseminated public information?

JK Rowling complained that protestors doxxed her by posting pictures that had her home address in them, but her home literally has its own wikipedia page.

Drew has to regularly cover his arse over that kind of stuff. You will have your post removed if you post someone's phone number/address on here, even if it exists on the website the article is linked to, or openly on said person public webpage.

Basically, everyone in charge of stuff knows how lazy and clickbaity people are. Reading TFA? I gotta make a comment. And reposting the information just feeds the mob who weren't going to go much beyond death threats in the thread/message board. Like placing a palletof bricks in the middle of the street right before a protest. You are baiting people to misbehave.

Please don't perpetuate that line of bullshiat.

https://www.adl.org/disinformation-suspicious-piles-of-bricks
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-are-photos-random-piles-bricks-kenosha-genuine-1650751
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/06/bricks-were-placed-for-construction-not-to-incite-protesters/

You've inadvertently made a good point about how so much of the structure of social media protects the powerful and further disempowers the weak though.


I guess the phrase "you are not immune to propoganda" rings true. Thank you for the fact check.
 
2021-11-30 12:46:28 PM  
This will be remembered as the point where the founder leaves a project and the whole thing goes to shiat, but it was always shiat and no one would admit it.
 
2021-11-30 12:47:54 PM  
Seen and read things on Twitter that I otherwise would never have been exposed to. Was any of it educational? No. Entertaining. Mildly. Could I have gone my entire life without all of it and been better served by using my time away from Twitter? Absolutely.
 
2021-11-30 12:48:03 PM  
They're going to have problems with:


NEW: media of private individuals without the permission of the person(s) depicted.


That's WAY too broad.  People are frequently in the background of other people's videos.
 
2021-11-30 12:49:40 PM  
Twitter? More like shiatter
 
2021-11-30 12:49:57 PM  
This is all pointing towards some big video is about to leak and the media and elites want to cover it up.

Sounds like somebody got a copy of Trump's pee tapes, and Putin wants it covered up.  And twitter is going to do Putin's bidding.
 
2021-11-30 12:50:43 PM  

GranoblasticMan: So, Twitter is now deciding to crack down on the kinds of activities that helped the FBI identify 1/6 terrorists. Cool.


Did they lose some viewers to Frank or Trump Truth or "Standing Near and Open Window and Yelling"?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2021-11-30 12:51:28 PM  

ColonelCathcart: ZAZ: Twitter banned doxxing and revenge porn long ago.  The new rule allows the subject of a photograph to complain about its sharing even when it isn't hot or even sexy: "this update will allow us to take action on media that is shared without any explicit abusive content, provided it's posted without the consent of the person depicted."  After the complaint (by the subject or a representative) the Twitter mod team will be asked to judge if the person is a private or public figure; whether the person is a woman or minority; whether the newsworthiness value exceeds the harassment harm; whether the tweet "adds value to the public discourse"; and whether the tweet is "relevant to the community."

When some girl posts a fully clothed picture of her ex, comment "this is relevant to my interests" if you want it to stay.

Doxxing us white guys is okay, I guess.


Doxxing white guys is still out, as is revenge porn of them.  Posting their non-naked pictures without consent is more likely to be allowed.  The new photo policy is primarily intended to protect "women, activists, dissidents, and members of minority communities."
 
Oak
2021-11-30 12:51:31 PM  

vsavatar: I'm mildly annoyed that they ended the independent clause leading up to the list of private information you can't share in a preposition.


It's a violation up with which you should not put.

/You knew it was coming, didn't you?
 
2021-11-30 12:51:38 PM  
90% of Twitter and Facebook are bot accounts and fake accounts at this point
 
2021-11-30 12:51:55 PM  
Twitter is the internet equivalent of the Centralia mine fire.
 
2021-11-30 12:51:58 PM  
Twitter being able to shield a favored Candidate is not on the table?
 
2021-11-30 12:53:52 PM  

GranoblasticMan: So, Twitter is now deciding to crack down on the kinds of activities that helped the FBI identify 1/6 terrorists. Cool.


Most of those were people putting up pictures of themselves.
 
2021-11-30 12:54:00 PM  
The Official Fark Cajun: 90% of Twitter and Facebook are bot accounts and fake accounts at this point

Fixed 90% of your post.
 
2021-11-30 12:56:47 PM  

GOSH BARN IT: The Official Fark Cajun: 90% of Twitter and Facebook are bot accounts and fake accounts at this point

Fixed 90% of your post.


Touche
 
2021-11-30 12:56:49 PM  

JessieL: AppleOptionEsc: JessieL: How long until powerful people regularly start claiming to have been "doxxed" by the sharing of widely disseminated public information?

JK Rowling complained that protestors doxxed her by posting pictures that had her home address in them, but her home literally has its own wikipedia page.

Drew has to regularly cover his arse over that kind of stuff. You will have your post removed if you post someone's phone number/address on here, even if it exists on the website the article is linked to, or openly on said person public webpage.

Basically, everyone in charge of stuff knows how lazy and clickbaity people are. Reading TFA? I gotta make a comment. And reposting the information just feeds the mob who weren't going to go much beyond death threats in the thread/message board. Like placing a palletof bricks in the middle of the street right before a protest. You are baiting people to misbehave.

Please don't perpetuate that line of bullshiat.

https://www.adl.org/disinformation-suspicious-piles-of-bricks
https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-are-photos-random-piles-bricks-kenosha-genuine-1650751
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/06/bricks-were-placed-for-construction-not-to-incite-protesters/

You've inadvertently made a good point about how so much of the structure of social media protects the powerful and further disempowers the weak though.


Not to get off the point.

But you realize that the original claim: Authorities are leaving brick piles in hopes of instigating a riot from protest.

Newsweek investigation involves asking cops, part of the authority in question?

"Oh no!  People were complaining to us about piles of bricks!  They were worried about the danger to their pal, the cops!"
 
2021-11-30 12:56:57 PM  

SavageWombat: It's so cops can demand that the video of them abusing power be taken down.


Yep. And Karens can demand their racist tirades be taken offline before they get fired.
 
2021-11-30 12:58:14 PM  

Kris_Romm: They're going to have problems with:


NEW: media of private individuals without the permission of the person(s) depicted.


That's WAY too broad.  People are frequently in the background of other people's videos.


No, you have no expectations of privacy in public.
 
2021-11-30 1:00:36 PM  

Solty Dog: Twitter is the internet equivalent of the Centralia mine fire.


The Centralia mine fire doesn't spread.  The chaos from Twitter does.
 
2021-11-30 1:01:49 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: Kris_Romm: They're going to have problems with:


NEW: media of private individuals without the permission of the person(s) depicted.


That's WAY too broad.  People are frequently in the background of other people's videos.

No, you have no expectations of privacy in public.


Sure, but then tell that to the people who came up with that policy wording.

It'll get tested soon and they'll just have to rewrite it.
 
2021-11-30 1:02:20 PM  

GranoblasticMan: So, Twitter is now deciding to crack down on the kinds of activities that helped the FBI identify 1/6 terrorists. Cool.


No: that's a public event.

FBI has been using Twitter as an asset.
 
2021-11-30 1:05:52 PM  

ZAZ: ColonelCathcart: ZAZ: Twitter banned doxxing and revenge porn long ago.  The new rule allows the subject of a photograph to complain about its sharing even when it isn't hot or even sexy: "this update will allow us to take action on media that is shared without any explicit abusive content, provided it's posted without the consent of the person depicted."  After the complaint (by the subject or a representative) the Twitter mod team will be asked to judge if the person is a private or public figure; whether the person is a woman or minority; whether the newsworthiness value exceeds the harassment harm; whether the tweet "adds value to the public discourse"; and whether the tweet is "relevant to the community."

When some girl posts a fully clothed picture of her ex, comment "this is relevant to my interests" if you want it to stay.

Doxxing us white guys is okay, I guess.

Doxxing white guys is still out, as is revenge porn of them.  Posting their non-naked pictures without consent is more likely to be allowed.  The new photo policy is primarily intended to protect "women, activists, dissidents, and members of minority communities."


Doxxing by itself has nothing to do with nudity, so my point stands.
 
2021-11-30 1:05:56 PM  
Great. Next, can Twitter take action on that literal Nazi that I reported to them like a whole month ago?
 
2021-11-30 1:09:47 PM  
But mah free dumbs.
 
2021-11-30 1:11:06 PM  

Darth_Lukecash: Tonto's Expanding Headband: I have managed to go all of those 16 years without ever once thinking:

I need to get this on Twitter!

or Let's see what Twitter has to say!

Just because it's a newish idea using newish technology that doesn't mean it's a good idea.

/off my lawn please

The amount of news and information that originated from Twitter alone tells me you don't think past your little "holier than thou" attitude.

The Arab Spring was driven and reported almost completely by Twitter.


Honestly would have been easier using the fediverse, email, or any other distributed tech rather than something centralized and easily blocked.
 
Displayed 50 of 98 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.