My recent withdrawal from Twitter left me feeling annoyed. I am in complete agreement with Milo that a live news social media platform could be done much better and also more efficiently monetised. The more I analysed it the more feasible it seemed I could get a prototype to release stage quite quickly. So …
Fitter. A better, more professional social network for live news and life sharing. In development.
Part of the the current development database diagram is below. It is actually nearly feature complete and I am currently working on a web layer to access it. Technologies used across the stack are currently SQL Server, MVC Web API and AngularJS 1.
Part of the work-in-progress development database for Fitter. Click for Full Size.
This is intended to be a free speech, cultural libertarian platform for most people, but at the same time to be flexible enough for people to have their own hugbox if they want. The idea is to create a platform where minimal staff intervention is required. For example, blocks will be reciprocal, so no blocking then taunting.
Ideally everyone will find it a better user experience, from supporters of #GamerGate to @NotAllowedToBeFreeBSDGirlAnyMore (archive here). More information soon!
Twitter – Compliant With EU Data Protection Laws? They better be.
Midway through last year, Twitter moved data control for all non-EU citizens to Ireland in the EU. Twitter then declared its subsidiary, ‘Twitter International Company’ to be a data controller in the EU for all non-US citizens. This brought it under EU Data Protection law.
A few weeks ago on 30/01/2016, a French man won a case in a Paris appeals Court that he could sue Facebook for suspending him,
The Witchfinder comments on how users can use EU law to assert their rights on Twitter.
So last week I was suspended from Twitter. All of my accounts were simultaneously suspended. There was no explanation – no ‘you are a spammer / meanie / aggressive follower’. I assumed the most likely reason was my article criticising Motherboard Associate Editor Sarah Jeong for doxing a rape victim, although this later turned out to be incorrect when they finally did give reasons.
A few days ago I was suspended from Twitter (twice). I was soon unsuspended after appealing and contacting their corporate counsel, and was told it was a mistake. However I was quite disappointed with the site, as I will deal with in a forthcoming article. It caused me to review the benefits I derive from Twitter.
I realised I barely use my personal Twitter account, so I decided to deactivate it. I use other social media to speak to my friends. My parody bot account is also unused.
I have renamed and deactivated @sam_c_smith. I have deactivated @BigFriendlyHat. These accounts will be deleted in due course.
@MHWitchfinder has also been unsuspended but I have renamed it as I am considering retiring it and ceasing to use Twitter. Although I do get some traffic from Twitter, I get much more from repeat users, friends and better sites like Reddit and Voat. The aggravation, with trolls and arbitrary suspension algorithms is also much greater with Twitter leaving it with a very low cost / benefit ratio.
As I am free to rejoin in future, I say ‘taking a break’. In reality Twitter will need to work to entice back the users it is losing and given its recent financial performance, there is a possibility that it will simply not be there.
As it happens, I am presently working on my own social media application, which will be free-speech friendly and is coming soon.
Parody Image of Sarah Jeong, Opponent of Revenge Porn Criminalisation and Associate of Sarah Nyberg. Image used pursuant to s30A Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
The Witchfinder exposes Sarah Jeong (@SarahJeong), a self-described ‘feminist’ who opposes the criminalisation of revenge porn and only last week violated a rape survivor again by revealing her name as a victim, republishing the information even after a larger publication took the material down.
In the United Kingdom, revealing the identity of a rape victim in the press is a criminal offence pursuant to s4(5) Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976. This was extended to nearly all victims of sex crimes, regardless of gender, pursuant to s20(1) of Schedule 6 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.