I dunno. It'd be nice. I personally like rearranging deck chairs like this. It was civil and, hopefully, productive.
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 17:39, Dewald Pretorius <dpr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I often wonder whether our non-API musings here on these forums have > any effect on anything, or are we just amusing ourselves by > rearranging deck chairs? > > Dewald > > On Oct 13, 8:03 pm, Justyn <justyn.how...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If duplicate tweets are the concern, then why are RT's on their way to > > being a feature? > > > > Abuse is the concern. Not duplicate content, right? > > > > So a local restaurant can't setup a tweet to go out on Wednesdays to > > remind their followers of 1/2 off appetizers? There's no ill intent > > here, and they have businesses to run. Doesn't twitter want businesses > > to foster it's platform? There's valid uses for recurring content > > within reason. It's not realistic to ask users to come up with 52 > > unique headlines, hunt down the associated link and fire up the laptop > > prior to happy to hour every Wednesday at 6:00 in order to get a > > message out to people who opted to follow them. > > > > What's the happy-medium here? > > > > On Oct 13, 4:00 pm, JDG <ghil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > They already do that ... in SOME cases. Pharmacies are required (or > maybe > > > simply strongly encouraged) to sell OTC meds like Sudafed behind the > counter > > > because some people use that to make crystal meth. The government > requires a > > > waiting period on guns because some people use guns to murder people. > > > > > Rightly or wrongly -- and I seriously believe you did this with no > abusive > > > intent -- you provided a tool that made it very easy for users to post > > > duplicate tweets. They didn't shut you down. They gave you a stern > warning. > > > > > On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 14:39, Dewald Pretorius <dpr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > Now there is an excellent analogy, which begs the question, "Where is > > > > the user's responsibility in this?" > > > > > > I have very clearly warned my users, every time they enter a tweet, > > > > that they must adhere to the Twitter Rules, with hyperlinks to those > > > > rules. That was not good enough. > > > > > > So, with your analogy in mind, should the authorities pull over > > > > speeders, or should they shut down manufacturers that make vehicles > > > > that can exceed the speed limit? Or, in a different analogy, should > > > > the government shut down Home Depot because they sell chain saws and > > > > box cutters, and some people use chain saws and box cutters to murder > > > > other human beings? > > > > > > Dewald > > > > > > On Oct 13, 5:31 pm, JDG <ghil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Yes, and should be treated as such. I personally detest all those > stupid > > > > > twitter-based games. Point is, with Twitter's userbase, some get > through > > > > the > > > > > cracks. Don't like it, report it. This is like complaining that > cops only > > > > > pull over SOME speeders. Yeah, some are going to get through the > cracks. > > > > > -- > > > Internets. Serious business. > -- Internets. Serious business.
