Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious watching the liberals slamming the messengers as a way to avoid dealing with the fact that what conservatives have been complaining about for the past few years was not a conspiracy theory.

There was a lot of talk about followers disappearing from people’s feeds. Is that true?

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious watching the liberals slamming the messengers as a way to avoid dealing with the fact that what conservatives have been complaining about for the past few years was not a conspiracy theory.

It's even more hilarious watching posters like you deny that Taibbi documented that what conservatives have been complaining about is actually a baseless conspiracy theory.

It was enough to get Baker fired.

Elon was going to fire Baker as soon as he figured out he was THAT Jim Baker. It’s pretty sad that it took him more than a month to realize it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To be sure, the way this was rolled out — painfully slow, weird photos of computer screens, and promises of wait! there’s more!, but you can read about it at our new site, please subscribe … is not helping these Free Speech Fighters’ cause. Still, in my view, they have pointed out a few important things.

Name 1

What important things do you think they have revealed that were not previously known (or obvious to anyone with half a brain)?

Anonymous wrote:To be sure, the way this was rolled out — painfully slow, weird photos of computer screens, and promises of wait! there’s more!, but you can read about it at our new site, please subscribe … is not helping these Free Speech Fighters’ cause. Still, in my view, they have pointed out a few important things.

Name 1

To be sure, the way this was rolled out — painfully slow, weird photos of computer screens, and promises of wait! there’s more!, but you can read about it at our new site, please subscribe … is not helping these Free Speech Fighters’ cause. Still, in my view, they have pointed out a few important things.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So now "#TwitterFiles2" is trending, with Bari Weiss breathlessly posting a thread about "OMG, WE DISCOVERED A SECRET BLACKLIST!!!!1!"

While the rest of us are "yawn, that's the shadowbans, the world has known about that for a long time already."

Yet more proof Twitter was taken over by clueless noobs.

Except Dorsey testified under oath there was no shadowbans going on

Define "shadowbans" so we know what you are talking about. That term has had a very elastic meaning over the past couple of days.

I thought it meant a user posts and no one can see the post other than the user, unaware they have been banned.
Twitter had lower levels of this where the user is treated differently, but the tweets can still be seen, but wouldn't come up in searches, or only the followers could see the tweets.

That's what I thought as well, but that not what Barri Weiss has been describing.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So now "#TwitterFiles2" is trending, with Bari Weiss breathlessly posting a thread about "OMG, WE DISCOVERED A SECRET BLACKLIST!!!!1!"

While the rest of us are "yawn, that's the shadowbans, the world has known about that for a long time already."

Yet more proof Twitter was taken over by clueless noobs.

Except Dorsey testified under oath there was no shadowbans going on

Define "shadowbans" so we know what you are talking about. That term has had a very elastic meaning over the past couple of days.

I thought it meant a user posts and no one can see the post other than the user, unaware they have been banned.
Twitter had lower levels of this where the user is treated differently, but the tweets can still be seen, but wouldn't come up in searches, or only the followers could see the tweets.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So now "#TwitterFiles2" is trending, with Bari Weiss breathlessly posting a thread about "OMG, WE DISCOVERED A SECRET BLACKLIST!!!!1!"

While the rest of us are "yawn, that's the shadowbans, the world has known about that for a long time already."

Yet more proof Twitter was taken over by clueless noobs.

Except Dorsey testified under oath there was no shadowbans going on

Define "shadowbans" so we know what you are talking about. That term has had a very elastic meaning over the past couple of days.

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hilarious watching the liberals slamming the messengers as a way to avoid dealing with the fact that what conservatives have been complaining about for the past few years was not a conspiracy theory.

It's even more hilarious watching posters like you deny that Taibbi documented that what conservatives have been complaining about is actually a baseless conspiracy theory.

It was enough to get Baker fired.

The thing Baker getting fired proves is that Musk can fire whomever he wants. It doesn't prove or disprove anything of significance beyond that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So now "#TwitterFiles2" is trending, with Bari Weiss breathlessly posting a thread about "OMG, WE DISCOVERED A SECRET BLACKLIST!!!!1!"

While the rest of us are "yawn, that's the shadowbans, the world has known about that for a long time already."

Yet more proof Twitter was taken over by clueless noobs.

Except Dorsey testified under oath there was no shadowbans going on

Anonymous wrote:Screenshots of people’s DMs, which are supposed to be private. So much for “trust and safety.”

Speaking of which, three members of Twitter’s trust and safety council resigned today. “A Twitter ruled by diktat is not a place for us.”

Screenshots of people’s DMs, which are supposed to be private. So much for “trust and safety.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So now "#TwitterFiles2" is trending, with Bari Weiss breathlessly posting a thread about "OMG, WE DISCOVERED A SECRET BLACKLIST!!!!1!"

While the rest of us are "yawn, that's the shadowbans, the world has known about that for a long time already."

Yet more proof Twitter was taken over by clueless noobs.

Bari Weiss isn’t exactly an intellectual heavyweight.

You aren't kidding...

People more knowledgeable about such things than me are theorizing that the use of photos of screen views rather than proper screenshots, combined with the faint watermark you can see on the photos, indicates that the program being viewed had privacy safeguards in place that were specifically designed to prevent screenshots. Ella Irwin, Twitter’s new VP of Trust and Safety, has admitted that the watermark is her user id and that she took the screenshots of user data to send to Weiss and Taibbi.