https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/29/exclusive-twitter-suspends-u-s-border-chief-for-celebrating-walls-protection-from-illegal-aliens/

A spokesperson for Twitter told The Federalist Thursday afternoon that the decision to lock Morgan’s account was “reversed after further evaluation.”

Though I must say I think twitter needs to raise the bar for getting locked.  That post clearly did not violate any rules.   Nor was it fake news.  I think anything not fake news should be allowed regardless if it "glorifies violence or threatens people (non specific):.   This is where I think twitter is starting to trend to violating free speech.

OMG!  Twitter actually had HUMANS in large enough numbers to look at a locked account and reverse the decision in less that a day?

I guess that kills your "millions of FB employees" argument, huh?

They looked at it after the automated report locking the account....You expect everyone to be humans and no automation.

I never said that.  You did.

Stop telling me what I said.  Quote me, or stick to the facts.  Both?

FB set up the system.  If they wanted to shut down false reporting, they could.  Just don't delete anything until a HUMAN views the posts in their entirety and judge it IN CONTEXT. Most of the accounts used to report people would then be locked once the pattern of serial trolling and reporting emerges.

Yes.

How is "don't delete" the same as "don't have ANY automation?"

The reporting and escalation process can be automated, but censorship needs a human to review and approve it. 

They hire outside help to fact check thousands of comments per worker per day.  They can afford a few more to manage the approval process after the AI algorithms notify them action is needed.

I guess an IT guy would know how this can work.  I've created systems that do this.  Rules find problems, operators or admins are notified, those people approve or cancel recommended actions.

It's not rocket surgery, but is does require system design and engineering experience.

Right now when plenty of people flag a post or fact checkers say its false it AUTOMATICALLY removes it.  which you dislike. Only way to stop this is to not have automation and have humans check.  Thus no automation if you require humans.  They would have to hire way more people to not only fact check, check every single report.  At that point they will have an army of staff to moderate. 

It technically possible I know that but is it practical?   With budget.  How will you enforce no bias from all these different humans with different viewpoints?

A spokesperson for Twitter told The Federalist Thursday afternoon that the decision to lock Morgan’s account was “reversed after further evaluation.”

Though I must say I think twitter needs to raise the bar for getting locked.  That post clearly did not violate any rules.   Nor was it fake news.  I think anything not fake news should be allowed regardless if it "glorifies violence or threatens people (non specific):.   This is where I think twitter is starting to trend to violating free speech.

Twitter is a private company, they can't violate free speech rights.

They are arguing to be protected from 230 that they have to be a public forum (free speech)  they can't have the cake and eat it too.  If they want to truly limit free speech then they have to give up 230.

Twitter is a private company, they can't violate free speech rights.

Incorrect.

It's been said by the courts (during the Occupy Wall Street mess) that private property can be deemed a public forum if the property has displaced what could deemed the "town commons" -- a place where free speech is permitted.  Therefore, the private parks everyone was camped in could not be cleared out by the private owners of the property.  There were no public parks in that area owned by the government, so the private parks were deemed to be covered by the First Amendment for protesters.

Most things are not as simple as they seem.

If the Big Tech SM companies have essentially replaced the town square for political speech, it follows the First Amendment protections for the people using it apply.

That is talking about physical property as I understand it but it is interesting how they might extend that reasoning to online platforms. There would be a number of challenges though, most notably would be that the internet platforms can be theoretically limitless while lang is not, there is only so many parks in a city for example.

They are arguing to be protected from 230 that they have to be a public forum (free speech)  they can't have the cake and eat it too.  If they want to truly limit free speech then they have to give up 230.

No, it was talking about public forums versus privately owned forums.  Since the Internet and SM have replaced physical gathering places for free speech, it applies here, too.

Not a difficult concept, really.  Just like privacy, free speech also applies to digital media.

The lines between a platform, a publisher, and a distributor are not well drawn from what I have read. So while an argument can be made that moderation means going from a platform to a publisher, I think it would be a bit of a tough argument to make on a number of levels and isn't clearly established. To decide such a case in which FB or Twitter overstepped the line they are going to have to first draw a line and that, to me, seems an exceedingly difficult line to draw.

The thing that worries me is what kind of precedent could it set? Might it scare companies from every moderating? Might it prevent companies from ever starting? The ramifications could travel far and wide if section 230 is done away with or interpreted in such a way that moderation is seen as becoming a publisher.

Most platforms, even 2ahawaii has some level of moderation but imagine this forum lost their protections under section 230, they could theoretically be sued out of existence.


Personally if Facebook or Twitter, or any such platform decides they want to become an echo chamber and only allow certain voices/messages then I say let them. Let the free market do it's thing and have the next Facebook come out provide a better service.

I agree this is a very sensitive topic, one that has enormous consequences.  I think everyone is trending the fine gray line right now.   I would rather not touch 230.  It's working mostly as intended now.

I would rather not touch 230.  It's working mostly as intended now.