• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Twitter suspends Rose McGowans account

Status
Not open for further replies.
KHarvey16 said:
Twitter specifically and intentionally targeting a woman speaking out against a powerful man who abused her in order to shut her up is ABSOLUTELY worse than any mix of incompetence and sheltered viewpoint story you could come up with. To deny that is utterly bizarre.
Click to expand...
The differences between Twitter targeting a woman and Twitter creating, directly or indirectly, an environment where women are consistently targets of abuse do not matter.

Twitter has been a platform where people, especially vocal women and minorities, are harassed without repercussions for so long that Twitter is complicit in the abuse.

Their defenses of algorithms, "free speech", general difficulty, and intentions have run out.
 
Joe said:
The differences between Twitter targeting a woman or creating, directly or indirectly, an environment where women are consistently targeted do not matter.

Twitter has been a platform where people, especially vocal women and minorities, are harassed without repercussions for so long that Twitter is complicit in the abuse.

Their defenses of algorithms, "free speech", and general difficulty have run out.
Click to expand...

Complete nonsense. You wouldn’t feel it to be any worse if Twitter went out of their way to target these people? Really? I can’t even process that it’s so ridiculous.

And again, you don’t get to dictate what it’s the same as and then criticize people defending against claims of the former for supporting the latter. It’s a bullshit argument tactic meant to stifle actual discussion.
 
Joe said:
Suspended only after it's non-suspension was publicized https://twitter.com/randileeharper/status/918512354060464131
Click to expand...

Which is a good thing? As I said Twitters moderation is pretty bad, but Rose McGowans account didn't get suspended as part of some conspiracy theory to shut her up/protect rapists, abusers and paedophiles. That's reaching right-wing levels of paranoia. A reasonable reason has been given to why the account temporarily got shutdown. Reasonable from the point of view it's plausible a phone number being public will temp shut down an account, arguments aside about Twitter just deleting tweets automatically.

You can be both unhappy with how Twitter run the site in general and accept why this account was temporarily suspended in this instance. As I said earlier conspiracy theories really don't help the case against the other problems Twitter has.
 
KHarvey16 said:
Complete nonsense. You wouldn’t feel it to be any worse if Twitter went out of their way to target these people? Really? I can’t even process that it’s so ridiculous.

And again, you don’t get to dictate what it’s the same as and then criticize people defending against claims of the former for supporting the latter. It’s a bullshit argument tactic meant to stifle actual discussion.
Click to expand...
I do not agree that Twitter targeting people is somehow worse than Twitter creating an environment where people are targeted without repercussions.

An employer harassing an employee is not better or worse than an employer tacitly approving employees harassing other employees. There is a culture of harassment where the employer is complicit.
 
Cybit said:
I do wonder if the Nazi issue is that the swatsika is also used heavily in Asian cultures as a good luck symbol. Not sure how you'd image search a 45 degree rotation of a symbol. (Might be doable though for all I know)
Click to expand...
Finnish Air Force also has used swastika as an insignia. It's not even that long ago that rings with a swastika were sold for charity to gather funds for the vets. If I remember correctly there was some controversy with the insignia in World of Tanks or in something similar.
Rautasormus.jpg
 
Joe said:
I do not agree that Twitter targeting people is somehow worse than Twitter creating an environment where people are targeted without repercussions.

An employer harassing an employee is not better or worse than an employer tacitly approving employees harassing other employees. There is a culture of harassment where the employer is complicit.
Click to expand...

Well, I don’t agree and I think it’s absolutely ludicrous to suggest there is no difference between the two. So much so I question your commitment to addressing such problems if you care so little about accurately defining them.
 
Audioboxer said:
Which is a good thing? As I said Twitters moderation is pretty bad, but Rose McGowans account didn't get suspended as part of some conspiracy theory to shut her up/protect rapists, abusers and paedophiles. That's reaching right-wing levels of paranoia. A reasonable reason has been given to why the account temporarily got shutdown. Reasonable from the point of view it's plausible a phone number being public will temp shut down an account, arguments aside about Twitter just deleting tweets automatically.

You can be both unhappy with how Twitter run the site in general and accept why this account was temporarily suspended in this instance. As I said earlier conspiracy theories really don't help the case against the other problems Twitter has.
Click to expand...
I don't believe there is a nefarious conspiracy. I believe that Twitter's policies have been a failure, continue to be a failure, and actively encourage, directly or indirectly, the breeding and propagation of harassment and hate.

Splitting the hairs of Twitter's intention in this instance is 'missing the forest for the trees' because it overlooks the larger and more pressing issues of their inconsistency on discretion and enforcement.
 
KHarvey16 said:
Well, I don't agree and I think it's absolutely ludicrous to suggest there is no difference between the two. So much so I question your commitment to addressing such problems if you care so little about accurately defining them.
Click to expand...
Yes. Of course, by definition, those scenarios are different. That is so obvious that I can't believe you actually expected me to acknowledge that.

What I am saying is that those are two paths leading to the same conclusion and arguing about which path was taken misses the bigger picture: that Twitter is complicit in both 'paths' so the 'path' doesn't matter (or is secondary at best).
 
Joe said:
I don't believe there is a nefarious conspiracy. I believe that Twitter's policies have been a failure, continue to be a failure, and actively encourage, directly or indirectly, the breeding and propagation of harassment and hate.

Splitting the hairs of Twitter's intention in this instance is 'missing the forest for the trees' because it overlooks the larger and more pressing issues of their inconsistency on discretion and enforcement.
Click to expand...

It's two issues. One is the honesty and reality around what happened here, and the other is how badly Twitter run the site in general.

Conflating the two is often what leads people to conspiracy theories, if not yourself. If I can find something bad Twitter does, then that means I can use that to say this situation still fits my beliefs. You can describe what happened here honestly, and then still go off and be critical of Twitter for everything else it does wrong. Which is, a lot.
 
entremet said:
So Jack, Twitter CEO, explained why she was banned and clarified the mod policy:

https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/918502629679939584
Click to expand...

Jack missed the part where he gotta phone call from a big wig at WB to see what he could do about her and if he had anything creative up his sleeve to chill her out a bit and signal to others what happens when you speak out against celebrities.

I joke of course but only partially because lets face it Harvey got away with crazy shit for decades despite assaulting some of the most famous actress ever so I am certain calls to suppress news and people is common practice.
 
Joe said:
Yes. Of course, by definition, those scenarios are different. That is so obvious that I can't believe you actually expected me to acknowledge that.

What I am saying is that those are two paths leading to the same conclusion and arguing about the path taken misses the bigger picture. Also, Twitter is complicit in both 'paths'.
Click to expand...

I don’t agree they do. A large corporation actively engaged in the targeted silencing of female voices relating experiences of sexual abuse from powerful men leads down an entirely different path than one that implements lax or ineffective policies and doesn’t prioritize the policing of content. I think mixing them up or arguing they lead to the same result betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the current problem and why it exists.
 
entremet said:
So Jack, Twitter CEO, explained why she was banned and clarified the mod policy:

https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/918502629679939584
Click to expand...

Yeah I just saw that tweet and I have never been more pissed off at their response as Twitter have done a crappy job in enforcing their guideline and when Rose is publicly speaking out against the abuse she suffered, Twitter chose now to selectively enforce their joke of a guideline and suspend her account whereas Trump account, where he has at least probably broken almost all of their guideline still remains.

I will be joining the #WomenBoycottTwitter event tomorrow and won't be using Twitter at all.

nynt9 said:
This response is savage:

gOcqLyW.png
Click to expand...

I applaud her for speaking out the truth.
 
Audioboxer said:
It's two issues. One is the honesty and reality around what happened here, and the other is how badly Twitter run the site in general.

Conflating the two is often what leads people to conspiracy theories, if not yourself. If I can find something bad Twitter does, then that means I can use that to say this situation still fits my beliefs. You can describe what happened here honestly, and then still go off and be critical of Twitter for everything else it does wrong. Which is, a lot.
Click to expand...
  • I do not believe Twitter was being intentionally hostile in this event.
  • I do believe Twitter displayed a failure in decision making in this event.
  • I do believe this event shined a high-profile spotlight on Twitter's decision making failures that have caused their long-standing policies to indirectly benefit hate and harassment while simultaneously suppressing women and minority voices.
  • I do believe that Twitter's policies have failed so badly for so long that they are complicit in abuse in harassment.
 
Mr-Joker said:
Yeah I just saw that tweet and I have never been more pissed off at their response as Twitter have done a crappy job in enforcing their guideline and when Rose is publicly speaking out against the abuse she suffered, Twitter chose now to selectively enforce their joke of a guideline and suspend her account whereas Trump account, where he has at least probably broken almost all of their guideline still remains.

I will be joining the #WomenBoycottTwitter event tomorrow and won't be using Twitter at all.



I applaud her for speaking out the truth.
Click to expand...
The whole day without Twitter, wow.
 
Joe said:
  • I do not believe Twitter was being intentionally hostile in this event.
  • I do believe Twitter displayed a decision making failure in this event.
  • I do believe this event shined a high-profile spotlight on Twitter's decision making failures that has caused their long-standing policy to indirectly benefit hate and harassment while simultaneously suppressing women and minority voices.
  • I do believe that Twitter's policy has failed so badly for so long that they are complicit in abuse.
Click to expand...

I do not disagree with any of that. The comments were just aimed at some of those who go straight to the worst case scenario without any evidence. It took a short amount of time to get an official response and the account reinstated after the reasoning explained. As bad as Twitter are, the alternative of them specifically banning her account to stop her talking about sexual abuse is the kind of thing if proven would really close the site down. It's on life support as it is, and sometimes there are explanations for situations that are more plausible. What should always matter is what is the truth, not what does anyone want the truth to be.

Twitter is getting bombarded now with other kinds of feedback which is fine (and everyone hopes they "listen"), it's just not helpful if people start conspiracy theories where there isn't one. That's happening far too much in general on the internet.

jrcbandit said:
Yep, this wasn't some big conspiracy on Twitter's part to silence oppressed women, just their utter incompetence when it comes to enforcing their policies.
Click to expand...

Pretty much, it's Twitter's incompetence at applying their TOS evenly and mostly across the board. There are a million examples of this person did x and didn't get banned and this person did x and did get banned. Or delayed reactions between the two.
 
Audioboxer said:
I do not disagree with any of that. The comments were just aimed at some of those who go straight to the worst case scenario without any evidence. It took a short amount of time to get an official response and the account reinstated. As bad as Twitter are, the alternative of them specifically banning her account to stop her talking about sexual abuse is the kind of thing if proven would really close the site down. It's on life support as it is, and sometimes there are explanations for situations that are more plausible. What should always matter is what is the truth, not what does anyone want to the truth to be.

Twitter is getting bombarded now with other kinds of feedback which is fine, it's just not helpful if people start conspiracy theories where there isn't one.
Click to expand...

Yep, this wasn't some big conspiracy on Twitter's part to silence oppressed women, just their utter incompetence when it comes to enforcing their policies.
 
KHarvey16 said:
Well, I don’t agree and I think it’s absolutely ludicrous to suggest there is no difference between the two. So much so I question your commitment to addressing such problems if you care so little about accurately defining them.
Click to expand...

I work for a big corporation amd we had a seminar on harrassment a few weeks ago. Both situations mentionned were as reprehensible as the other.
 
Audioboxer said:
I do not disagree with any of that. The comments were just aimed at some of those who go straight to the worst case scenario without any evidence. It took a short amount of time to get an official response and the account reinstated after the reasoning explained. As bad as Twitter are, the alternative of them specifically banning her account to stop her talking about sexual abuse is the kind of thing if proven would really close the site down. It's on life support as it is, and sometimes there are explanations for situations that are more plausible. What should always matter is what is the truth, not what does anyone want the truth to be.

Twitter is getting bombarded now with other kinds of feedback which is fine (and everyone hopes they "listen"), it's just not helpful if people start conspiracy theories where there isn't one. That's happening far too much in general on the internet.



Pretty much, it's Twitter's incompetence at applying their TOS evenly and mostly across the board. There are a million examples of this person did x and didn't get banned and this person did x and did get banned. Or delayed reactions between the two.
Click to expand...
The truth is that Twitter is a potent breeding ground for hate and real-world harassment and the issue of people immediately reacting to a worst-case-scenario when this was reported simply pales in comparison (and can arguably be attributed to Twitter's history of policy enforcement failures).
 
Twitter is terrible. I actually recently created an account to follow Wario64 during the holidays so I could get in on some price errors but fuck it, I refuse to support this company. Not worth the savings. I'll just refresh Gaf all the time instead.
 
Mathieran said:
Twitter is terrible. I actually recently created an account to follow Wario64 during the holidays so I could get in on some price errors but fuck it, I refuse to support this company. Not worth the savings. I'll just refresh Gaf all the time instead.
Click to expand...

They don’t really make any money off your account, their business model is pretty nonfunctional.
 
I think whatever good Twitter has done has been fully negated by this point. And it's not like this particular incident is the tipping point or anything; it's just another example to toss on the pile.
 
I'm down for #WomenBoycottTwitter as well. Though my twitter usage is minimal at most, cause I've thought it to be a cesspool for some time now. The harassment level is beyond toxic, and they haven't done much worthwhile to put an end to it.

Guess I'll have to use Instagram for my cute sumo pics instead.
 
Mr-Joker said:
I will be joining the #WomenBoycottTwitter event tomorrow and won't be using Twitter at all.
Click to expand...

So for an entire day you will practice self control and not use a platform that is systematically affecting the US on multiple sociological & political levels in a negative manner?

You are so brave.
 
Joe said:
The truth is that Twitter is a potent breeding ground for hate and real-world harassment and the issue of people immediately reacting to a worst-case-scenario when this was reported simply pales in comparison (and can arguably be attributed to Twitter's history of policy enforcement failures).
Click to expand...

I'd never say it was worse. The only issue with reacting to the worst case scenario before it's fact is many people never recalibrate their truth meter. They just stay in a stasis of "that was what I thought and I stand by it". Sometimes it doesn't matter what you thought was the truth, but what is the actual truth.
 
Is there anything that could remotely compete with Twitter? Because a boycott would be great but realistically I don’t see most following through. That the criticism of Twitter’s actions has to be posted on Twitter to get exposure kinda highlights the complications.
 
broncobuster said:
Is there anything that could remotely compete with Twitter? Because a boycott would be great but realistically I don’t see most following through. That the criticism of Twitter’s actions has to be posted on Twitter to get exposure kinda highlights the complications.
Click to expand...
All social media is pretty samey at this point and Twitter is the worst one.
 
Damn, there's a boycott tomorrow? I get why, but Twitter won't be nearly as fun to scroll through tomorrow since women make up so much of my feeds good content.
 
Goodstyle said:
Damn, there's a boycott tomorrow? I get why, but Twitter won't be nearly as fun to scroll through tomorrow since women make up so much of my feeds good content.
Click to expand...

You... could take the day off too...

It's 24 hours. Go for a run. Live. Do something else.
 
So she pissed off some powerful individuals and they made some calls and want to shut her up. So they suspended her account. Twitter is garbage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MLB lifts ban on Pete Rose
2
52
2K
AJUMP23 replied
X launches "About this account" feature, Backfires
2 3 4
164
1K
DeepEnigma replied
should I use twitter
2
50
2K
Grildon Tundy replied
Online Account Purging
5
409
Dirk Benedict replied
X / Twitter has become completely useless recently, defaults to "For you" instead of "Following" tab.
43
564
Nocty replied
Top Bottom