We'd like to get Twitter Comms to address it at some point, but the company is opaque. It's just nuts.
Somehow twitter believes that 1 years old are trying to join their platform. That was more than 6 months ago, and still no solution ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The company is just hostile to its users.
I should have kept a record of results. Some were good and easy. Some had no option other than an account closure. Some involved a single contact of support without any real verification that I was actually the account holder. Some involved a protracted string of contact with support that tried to claim I was asking for an impossibility. Some services kept my old email on file and I periodically receive something to my old address.
https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/com...
>7. I have a “mixed audience” app and would like to age screen my users. Are there specific requirements for the age screen?
>An example of a neutral age screen would be a system that allows a user freely to enter the month and year of birth. Avoid encouraging children to falsify age information by, for example, stating that certain features will not be available to users under age 13.
Like, if you were younger than 13 at some point, and you didn’t prove yourself that you’re no longer 13, it can’t be ruled out that you potentially haven’t aged since, by Twitter logic.
Seen through survivorship bias it’s obvious that you may never set DoB for any of your accounts, but ... I guess Twitter is kind of weird one from what SNS is generally understood to be.
No, that’s due to the fact that they don’t want to store any data about yourself from when you were under 13 years old. I had this happen to me when I changed my account age and it said it had to delete all tweets (amongst other info) from when I was <13 and my profile was wiped (bio, profile pic, website link), likely because they don’t timestamp profile changes in their DB (some audit log probably has it though).
https://help.twitter.com/en/managing-your-account/account-re...
I couldn't even log into the account to delete it without providing them a photo of my ID, so I said fuck that and never thought about it ever again.
As a thought exercise, if you assume there is 1% chance of someone complaining about something that went wrong with their account. And there is a billion users using that service. You will have to have a super high accuracy to not end up in a world where there isn't a dozen+ people being affected each month. I believe that Twitter (and other services) actually do try very hard to avoid this, but it is a very hard problem.
To this, some HN users believe that they just should have say 100k+ humans moderating everything, but it is very hard to have 100K humans consistently moderate and not introduce biases.
I will note that your thought exercise is a statment, least in part, of Masnick's Impossibility Theorem (Content Moderation At Scale Is Impossible To Do Well):
- Any moderation policy will anger someone
- Content moderation is inherently subjective
- Errors at scale result in many errors over time
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20191111/23032743367/masni...
Content moderation only becomes a problem where your business model is "growth and engagement" and your revenue depends on your users generating as much content as possible.
Real name polices already failed at their stated purpose even after people losing their job over tweets and Facebook posts was a well known things. Whatever fee people would be willing to pay wouldn't cut it. Hell it didn't work even on the infamous SomethingAwful!
All the issues you mention were successfully dealt with on the forums of the good old days with much less resources (moderation done by volunteers and very little technical expertise - definitely no machine learning).