manton
manton

Reading the Twitter 2.0 blog post again, I donā€™t think it says enough to actually be a vision for the company. Some bits sound okay (ā€œfreedom of speech, but not freedom of reachā€) and some seem actively misleading (ā€œnone of our policies have changedā€, just our enforcement).

|
Embed
jkohlmann@mastodon.social
jkohlmann@mastodon.social

@manton Sounds like a thing they put out just to pacify people who arenā€™t paying attention to the blow-by-blow coverage šŸ˜¤

|
Embed
manton
manton

@jkohlmann Probably so. I think it was a missed opportunity to actually outline a plan (for employees and users). No surprise, though.

|
Embed
vincent
vincent

@manton I stopped reading at "Twitterā€™s mission..." šŸ˜¬

|
Embed
MitchW
MitchW

@manton ā€œfreedom of speech, but not freedom of reachā€ is an endorsement of shadowbanning, which the right wrongly accused Twitter of doing for years, and now Musk seems to be saying OK we're going to do that.

|
Embed
kevin@social.lol
kevin@social.lol

@manton This blog post rings hollow.

|
Embed
brian_wolf
brian_wolf

@MitchW Also if a user has 119m or 87.7m followers what can stop reach? Retweets spread information like wildfire without algorithm boosts. Seems like suspend/ban is the only way to stop it.

|
Embed
bgrinter@mastodon.sdf.org
bgrinter@mastodon.sdf.org

@manton from what Iā€™ve read the trust team in Asia Pacific (includes Australia) has been gutted with one person left so not sure how things are normal

|
Embed
dave
dave

@manton -- it's complete šŸ’© -- written by a PR hack, and it's top to bottom lies.

|
Embed
In reply to
manton
manton

@dave Yep, šŸ’© was my first thought too, but Twitter actually does need a clear plan so I thought maybe it was in there somewhere. Not really.

|
Embed
devilgate
devilgate

@manton They also seem to have invented a new word: ā€œviolativeā€.

|
Embed