I disagree. These are people who are following accounts because the accounts favorite a tweet of theirs.
If you follow someone without looking into their profile and deciding if you are interested in their content then you get what you deserve.
If you follow someone without looking into their profile and deciding if you are interested in their content then you get what you deserve.
Note that you can substitute all sorts of adjectives for "dumb".
E.g., "those nerds are so unpopular they deserve to get beaten up". Or, "those people are poor enough that they deserve to live next to a toxic waste dump".
Basically, it's a way of taking whatever characteristic you pride yourself on and then making yourself feel even better about it by enjoying when shitty things happen to other people.
No, the "take responsibility for the outcome of your own actions" school of thought. Or do you think one should be able to wander through life, doing and saying anything one pleases, completely oblivious to your environment, and not expect bad things to happen sometimes?
A woman might choose to wear clothes that make her look sexy. But that doesn't justify a guy raping her.
I agree that people act dumb. But that doesn't justify predatory behaviour.
Nobody said it did, and that example is nothing like what we're talking about here.
The key difference being that in the prior example the negative impact is you follow someone that may not be of interest to you, in which case you can always un-follow. While a nerd or the poor will find they can't literally click a button to undo the "damage" that was done.
I get what you are trying to say, I disagree that you can apply that to this specific example. It would be better aimed at a rich person who literally thinks everyone on food stamps is a lazy bum.
This is also not something that is just happening to these people. They are taking an active part by deciding to follow someone.
I certainly don't belong to the school of thought that says you should never experience a negative outcome.
So, spam works. It still doesn't make it morally right to trick people into following you.
Favoriting a tweet has no connection with "Hey, I tweet about stuff that you are interested in so you should follow me." It's not even a request for someone to follow you.
I think this is incorrect. The intended purpose of "Favorites" is to communicate that a living, breathing person (as opposed to an "account," as you describe) saw my tweet, enjoyed it, and liked it enough to Favorite it.
The OP's product fraudulently claims to Twitter users that the customers of this product are engaging in that action.
edit: The main point being that the intended purpose is to communicate that an actual person actively read the tweet, and for whatever their reasons, actively decided to favorite the tweet.
Please don't use that rationale. Lots of people never get what they deserve, and pretty much nobody deserves the shit some people have to go through.
Either way, there are some people who don't just follow back, so they don't deserve the spam even by your definition. Most people here can automate follows, favorites and similar interactions, but don't. Some of us would like to keep those meaningful.