My opinion is that twitter is trying to keep it intentionally simple for the benefit of apps.
for Joe Regular, more options than allow / deny is going to create confusion and apps will suffer. Its pretty clear that if you tweet on behalf of users without consent there will be confusion/anger and you are at risk of blacklist and its at that point that Twitter should and does intervene, as an ISP would on spam. But before that, I think 2 choices are exactly what should be. On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Ben Metcalfe <ben.metca...@gmail.com>wrote: > What I'd actually like to see is some granularity in the oAuth > permissions that go beyond binary "has complete access: DENY|ALLOW", > and this would also solve this problem. > > Surprising users when an app auto-tweets is one thing, but I'm more > concerned about a given app reading my DM's, for example (which I > wouldn't know about, thus no 'surprise' but still bad). > > I would urge Twitter to look at Flickr's oAuth (well 'oAuth style') > auth which lets users dictate the level of access a given app is > allowed and even let developers appropriately request only the right > level they need. > > Twifficiency technically only needed read-only access to my public > tweets (ok, it wouldn't have had the viral aspect). If when I oAuthed > for it the twitter landing page said: > > Give app "Twifficiency" access to the following on your account? : > [x] public tweets > [ ] send tweets > [ ] read direct messages > > > This seems more appropriate but would also deal with the issue of > surprising auto-tweets when the app developer doesn't highlight it up > front. What do people think? > > Thanks, > Ben Metcalfe > > > > On Aug 18, 1:45 pm, Brian Sutorius <bsutor...@twitter.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Over the past 24 hours, we've received some questions about the > > Twifficiency app, so we thought we'd use this as an opportunity to > > quickly share some information around our Developer Principles. > > > > For background, the Twifficiency app computes a "Twifficiency score" > > based on different aspects of your Twitter account and posts the score > > as a Tweet. While the developer included a disclaimer that these > > Tweets would be posted to Twitter, user feedback indicated that the > > text was too far down on the page to be noticed before proceeding. As > > a result, many users were surprised that their scores were being > > tweeted automatically. > > > > Which brings us to our Developer Principles, one of which is "Don't > > surprise users." Specifically, we require developers to get users' > > permission before sending Tweets or other messages on their behalf. > > Allowing an application to access your account does not constitute > > consent for actions to automatically be taken on your behalf. > > > > Twifficiency violated this principle, so we suspended the app > > yesterday afternoon while we worked with the developer to make sure > > users were better informed about the application's actions and could > > control whether or not a Tweet would be posted. With these changes > > --which include a more prominent warning and a checkbox on the main > > page-- the application has been re-enabled. > > > > Our developer principles can be found in our API Terms of Service: > http://dev.twitter.com/pages/api_terms > > > > Brian Sutorius > > API Policy > -- Peter Denton Co-Founder, Product Marketing www.mombo.com cell: (206) 427-3866 twitter @Mombo_movies twitter - personal: @petermdenton
