Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Twitter Chief Legal Counsel Vijaya Gadde, and Journalist Tim Pool – The Joe Rogan Experience

Watch the episode here

Key Takeaways

  • According to Twitter’s Hateful Conduct Policy deadnaming and misgendering are a violation of their rules
    • What’s deadnaming? – If a transgender individual changes their birth name, you’re not allowed to call them by the name they went by before the transition
    • Misgendering refers to using a pronoun or form of address, that does not correctly reflect the gender with which someone identifies
  • The main thing Twitter is trying to do (this is important):
    • “My intention is to build a platform that gives as many people as possible the opportunity to freely express themselves” – Jack
      • When people encounter particular hateful conduct – they tend to remove themselves from the platform completely, which goes against the above – this is why Twitter’s specific rules/policies are in place
  • How does the process work once a tweet is reported?
    • Note – Twitter cannot yet recognize tweets that may go against their policies. They’re currently developing the algorithms to do so, but right now tweets must be reported.
    • As tweets are reported, they’re added to a queue and ranked by severity
      • What’s most severe? – If someone’s physical safety is harmed, or private information is leaked
    • A small content moderation team then examines the tweet and the context around it
      • They then have the ability to go down the enforcement spectrum:
        • 1) They make people log in to their Twitter account and read a message from Twitter explaining how they violated their policies, and force them to delete the tweet if they want to continue using the platform
        • 2) Temporary suspension if offenses are repeated
        • 3) Permanent ban as a last resort
  • On Banning:
    • “We don’t usually or automatically suspend accounts with one violation because we want people to learn and understand what they did wrong and give them an opportunity not to do it again. It’s a BIG thing to kick someone off the platform. We take that very, very seriously.” – Vijaya
  • Does Twitter have a liberal bias?
    • Tim brings up quite a few points:
      • Most of the people Twitter bans are conservative
      • Conservatives don’t agree with Twitter on the definition of misgendering
        • “If you have a rule in place that specifically adheres to the left ideology, you by default are enforcing rules from a biased perspective” 
        • The conservative view of misgendering – If someone is a biological male, and they’re called “she”
        • The progressive view (the same as Twitter’s policy) – if someone wants to be called “she” and they’re a biological male, that’s what needs to happen (and if someone doesn’t comply, depending on history/context, they’re prone to being banned)
          • “You actually have in your policies a rule against the conservative perspective”
    • Thoughts form Vijaya
      • “We have a rule against the abuse and harassment of trans people on our platform”
        • Why does Twitter have this rule?
          • Through much research with the American Association of Pediatrics, it’s been found that a very high number of transgender youths commit suicide (it’s about 10x the normal suicide rate for teens)
            • The main cause of this – bullying behavior (which Twitter wanted to avoid)
      • “All I’ll say is our intent is not to police ideology. Our intent is to police behaviors that we view as abuse and harassment.”
  • One problem with Twitter (brought up by Tim):
    • Someone in the U.S. can be banned from Twitter for not complying with their rules (like the misgendering policy), while foreigners are free to use the platform (as long as they comply with the rules) to influence U.S. elections

Intro

  • Jack Dorsey (@jack) is the CEO of Twitter and Square
    • He previously appeared on Joe’s podcast
      • Joe received a lot of negative backlash for not grilling him hard enough about platform censorship, banning etc.
    • Check out the Podcast Notes from his appearance on Sam Harris’ podcast
  • Tim Pool (@Timcast) is an independent journalist
    • Check out his website 
    • In the past, he’s been heavily critical of Jack and Twitter
    • Tim also recently appeared on Joe’s podcast, and they discussed a lot of Joe’s interview with Jack
  • Vijaya Gadde (@vijaya) is the global lead for legal, policy, and trust and safety at Twitter

Let’s State the Biases

  • The Cash App sponsors Joe’s podcast
    • It’s owned by Square (and Jack is their CEO)
  • Tim Pool owns 80 shares in Square

The Recent Shawn Baker Case

  • (He’s a huge proponent of the carnivore diet)
  • Joe brings up the fact that Shawn’s Twitter account was recently frozen (due to his header photo of a lion eating something) for “violating the rules against graphic violence or adult content in profile images”
    • So who’s decision was it to lock his account?
      • Vijaya:
        • It was probably an algorithm that detected it and made an assessment
        • “As a general rule, we rely on people to report information to us”
          • Anyone can “report a tweet”
        • And Shawn can repeal his frozen account – in which case it would be reviewed by a human
        • “I don’t think [this case] is a violation of the rules”

Mob Reporting

  • Joe brings up how certain groups of people (say vegans) can join forces to report every piece of content someone like Shawn Baker (a proponent of the carnivore diet) puts out
    • “It doesn’t really matter if 1 person reports something, or 10,000 people report something. We’re going to review the reports and make an assessment. We’ll never kick someone off the platform without an actual person examining the case and making sure that it’s an actual violation of the rules.” – Vijaya

Does Twitter Police Misinformation?

  • Tim:
    • At what point does Twitter start controlling/restricting the spread of certain controversial (and possibly false) pieces of information (like someone who advocates how vaccines are bad for you)
    • This is similar to how people on Youtube are being deranked for certain beliefs about certain health issues
  • Vijaya:
    • “That is not a violation of Twitter’s rules” 
  • Jack:
    • Twitter hasn’t dealt much with misinformation across various topics
      • He adds how people can freely access information from the opposite perspectives of that certain topic – people can make their own choices
  • Vijaya and Tim:
    • “Do you really want corporations to police what’s true and not true…we try not to do that” – Vijaya
    • “But you guys do that in your rules” – Tim
      • In Twitter’s rules, deadnaming or misgendering transgender people is prohibited
        • What’s deadnaming? – If a transgender individual changes their birth name, you’re not allowed to call them by the name they went by before the transition
        • Twitter has a Hateful Conduct Policy (in which the above rules are included) – this prohibits targeting or attacking someone based on their belonging to any number of groups
    • “The places that we focus on are those where we think people will be harmed [by the misinformation] in a direct and tangible way. We feel a responsibility to correct that.” – Vijaya 

On a High Level, Here’s How Twitter Regulates Things

  • “At a high level, I believe everyone has a voice and should be able to use it. Where we draw the line is when people use their voice to abuse and harass other people to silence them.” – Vijaya
    • “Our policies are meant to protect people and enable free expression as long as you’re not trying to silence someone else”
    • It’s VERY rare that Twitter will outright suspend someone without any warning 

The Kathy Griffin Case (Watch)

  • What happened?
    • She tweeted about how she wanted the names of the Covington Catholic High School kids wearing the red “Make America Great Again” hats (background story here)
  • Twitter’s doxing policy focuses on posting private information (and names are not considered to be private)
    • What is private? – Home addresses, phone numbers
    • So in this case…nothing happened. It didn’t violate the policy.
    • “But in this case, if I were to look at this again, I would probably ask my team to look at the purpose behind that tweet. If the purpose was to identify those kids to either dox them or abuse/harass them, which it probably was, then we should be taking a more expansive view of that policy and including that type of content.” – Vijaya
      • “But we will always make mistakes”

Important Points

  • Twitter prioritizes cases for review based on severity 
    • What’s most severe? – If someone’s physical safety is harmed, or private information is leaked
  • “We don’t usually or automatically suspend accounts with one violation because we want people to learn and understand what they did wrong and give them an opportunity not to do it again. It’s a BIG thing to kick someone off the platform – we take that very, very seriously.” – Vijaya
    • “I want to make sure that when someone violates our rules they understand what happened, and they’re given an opportunity to get back on the platform and change the behavior.”
      • In almost all cases then, if someone tweets something that violates the rules, Twitter will force them to delete their tweet/acknowledge it was wrong before they’re allowed to use the platform again
      • If they repeat the offense, they’ll get a temporary suspension
      • And if they do it a third time, they’re gone
  • “It’s not about one thing. It’s about a pattern and practice of violating our rules. We don’t want to kick someone off for one thing, but if there’s a pattern and practice, like there was for Milo (below) we’re going to have to take action.” – Vijaya

The Milo Yiannopoulos Banning (Watch)

  • Vijaya:
    • He had a number of tweets that violated the rules going back to 2014
    • But the latest offenses:
      • He claimed to be a Buzzfeed reported in his bio (impersonation)
      • He doxxed someone (he posted private information about an individual)
      • He tweeted to someone  – “If you were my child I would have dashed your head on a rock and tried again” (a threat)
        • (Joe doesn’t think this sounds all that bad)
      • He posted a bunch of tweets falling under the abuse category against Leslie Jones

Twitter’s Liberal Bias (Watch)

  • A brief exchange to start
    • “The concern is that this is always leaning towards the left” – Joe
    • “It absolutely does. I’m not even getting started.” – Tim
    • “I can understand why you feel that way, but I don’t think it’s true. We look at each individual instance of violations of our rules and try to make the best case we can.” – Vijaya
  • A point from Tim:
    • “One really important thing that needs to be stated – Twitter, by definition, is a biased platform in favor of the left, period. It’s not a question.” 
      • Why? – Conservatives don’t agree with Twitter on the definition of misgendering
        • “If you have a rule in place that specifically adheres to the left ideology, you by default are enforcing rules from a biased perspective” 
        • Tim expands:
          • The conservative view of misgendering – If someone is a biological male, and they’re called “she”
          • The progressive view (the same as Twitter’s policy) is inverted – if someone wants to be called “she” and they’re a biological male, that’s what needs to happen (and if someone doesn’t comply, depending on history/context, they’re prone to being banned)
            • “You actually have in your policies a rule against the conservative perspective”
  • Vijaya responds:
    • “We have a rule against the abuse and harassment of trans people on our platform”
    • Why does Twitter have this rule?
      • Through much research with the American Association of Pediatrics, it’s been found that a very high number of transgender youths commit suicide (it’s about 10x the normal suicide rate for teens)
        • The main cause of this – bullying behavior (which Twitter wanted to avoid)
  • Back to Tim:
    • (Tim agrees with the rule – he just wants to state the facts)
      • People like Ben Shapiro, through his own research, does not agree with this specific policy of Twitter’s. What research? – Joe comments:
        • There is a tremendous suicide rate among transgender people period (~40%) – it’s hard to pin down an exact cause
    • “This rule is at odds with conservatives, period” 
    • Joe adds:
      • “If your standards and your policies are not biologically accurate, then you’re dealing with an ideological policy”
    • Vijaya closes:
      • “There are a lot of people on the left who don’t agree with how we’re doing our job either”
        • “All I’ll say is our intent is not to police ideology. Our intent is to police behaviors that we view as abuse and harassment.”

Related to Tim’s Accusation that Twitter Has a Liberal Bias – The Meghan Murphy Case

  • Meghan was banned from Twitter for misgendering an individual after being warned multiple times
    • The tipping point was saying something along the lines of – “A man is never a woman”
      • Biologically she’s correct – But it doesn’t fit with Twitter’s ideological policy
      • “It’s not that you can’t have those viewpoints. It’s if you’re taking those viewpoints and targeting someone in a way that reflects your way to abuse and harass them” – Vijaya

Further Related to Tim’s Accusation that Twitter Has a Liberal Bias – He Brings Up a Few Personal Examples 

  • While covering an event in California, he received a tweet telling others to “attack him if they saw him”
    • He reported the tweet, but it wasn’t found to be in violation of Twitter’s policies
    • Vijaya comments on how this must have been a mistake
  • Then – someone tweeted something making an illusion to Tim being a homosexual
    • He reported the tweet, and the tweet has since been removed
    • “Of course Twitter is going to enforce the social justice aspect of their policy immediately…but when someone threatens me with a crime, nothing got done”
  • An exchange between Tim and Vijaya:
    • “Our platform promotes free speech, unless people violate our rules” – Vijaya
      • Tim adds – “In a specific direction [right vs. left]” 
      • Vijaya responds – “In ANY direction”
        • “Bans are never about one a particular thing. It’s about a pattern and practice of violating our rules.” – Vijaya
    • “You have a pattern and practice of banning only one faction of people” – Tim
      • Tim mentions an article from 2015 which discussed how of 22 high profile bannings, 21 of them were “only on one side of the cultural debate”
        • Sorry – we couldn’t find this article
      • “I don’t agree with that. I don’t look at the political spectrum of people when I’m looking at their tweets” – Vijaya

Education and Transparency – What Twitter Needs to do Better

  • “We haven’t done enough education about what our rules are. A lot of people violate our rules and don’t even know it.” – Vijaya
  • “We need to be really clear about what types of behavior are caught by our rules and what types are not, and to be transparent within the product.” – Vijaya
    • Vijaya says that it’s in the works so that when a particular tweet is found to be in violation of the rules – it will be marked as such

Why was Alex Jones banned? (Watch)

  • Jack:
    • First, iTunes removed him from their podcast directory
    • Then he was banned from Spotify, Facebook, and Youtube
      • Twitter did not ban him at this point – “When we looked at the reports on our service, we did not find anything in violation of our rules”
    • But then many people started reporting content on Twitter from Alex Jones
      • Alex was then given a warning
  • Joe asked what was it then that made Twitter ban him, and Vijaya responds – “There were 3 separate incidences which came to our attention, after the fact”…
    • There was a video uploaded by him showing a child being violently thrown to the ground and crying
    • There was a video uploaded viewed as “incitement of violence”
      • Vijaya reads the transcript of the video here
    • Alex had a violent verbal altercation with a journalist on Twitter (the original conversation took place on Periscope, but much of it was reposted to Twitter). Some of his comments included:
      • “He is just scum”
      • “You’re a virus to America”
      • “You smell like a possum that climbed out of the rear end of a dead cow”

Content Moderation (Watch)

  • “There’s a prosperous volume that you guys have to deal with” – Joe
    • “It’s an enormously complicated challenge for any company to do content moderation at scale” – Vijaya
    • “It doesn’t scale” – Jack
  • There are hundreds of millions of tweets per day
    • Vijaya says they have 4,000 total employees around the world and only a small number of them monitors tweets
  • How does the process work once a tweet is reported?
    • As tweets are reported, they’re added to a queue and ranked by severity
    • The small number of people mentioned above then examine the tweet and the context around it
      • They have the ability to go down the enforcement spectrum:
        • 1) They make people log in to their Twitter account and read a message from Twitter explaining how they violated their policies, and force them to delete the offensive tweet if they want to continue using the platform
        • 2) Temporary suspension if offenses are repeated
        • 3) Permanent ban as a last resort

Something Twitter is Working On

  • Jack:
    • Twitter focuses most on harms to someone’s physical safety
    • “Right now the only way we take action on a doxing case is if it’s reported or not. What we want to move to is being able to recognize those, in real time, at least in the English language through our machine learning algorithms, and take action before it has to be reported.”
      • This is one of the key things Twitter is focusing on at the moment
  • Vijaya:
    • “Right now, we have a system that relies on people to report things to us for review. We have to start getting better at recognizing when this is happening and taking action, without someone waiting to tell us it’s happening”
      • As mentioned above – this is something Twitter is really working on, but it’s not easy getting the algorithms right – they’re focused on doxing first to protect physical safety

Twitter’s Influence, Elections, and Regulation (Watch)

  • Tim:
    • “I think it can’t be disputed that Twitter is extremely powerful at influencing elections”
      • “You’ve now got a platform so powerful in our American discourse that foreign governments are using it as weapons against us” 
      • Related – Twitter recently published a bunch of tweets from foreign actors trying to meddle in the 2016 U.S. election – “Even you as a company recognize that foreign entities are trying to manipulate people using this platform”
      • Tim adds – Someone in the U.S. can be banned from Twitter for not complying with the misgendering policy, while foreigners are free to use the platform (as long as they comply with the rules) to influence U.S. elections
  • Tim also brings up another point:
    • “There is a dramatic difference between what Twitter thinks is okay, and what the U.S. government thinks is okay”
      • Someone can freely yell hate speech on a street corner to a crowd – this is not allowed on Twitter
      • “Twitter is becoming extremely important in how our public discourse is occurring, how our culture is developing, and who even gets elected. If you [Twitter] have rules that are based on a global policy, that means American citizens who are abiding by all the laws of our country are being restricted from engaging in public discourse because you’ve monopolized that.”
        • “At a certain level, there are going to be American citizens who have been removed from this public discourse, because you [Twitter] have different rules than the American country has”
      • So we have an issue..
      • Tim sums up – “I would have to assume, if Twitter refuses to say, ‘In the United States you’re allowed to say what’s legally acceptable period,’ then lawmakers only choice will be to enforce regulation on your company”
        • “As a private platform, you’ve become too powerful not to be regulated if you refuse to allow people free speech”
  • Jack responds with a good point:
    • Twitter is trying to create the opportunity for every single person to speak freely on the platform
      • When people encounter particular hateful conduct – they tend to remove themselves from the platform completely, which goes against the above – this is why the rules/policies are in place
  • Vijaya adds:
    • “From the perspective of lawmakers, they are across the spectrum in favor of policing abuse and harassment online”
    • “I think, as a private American business, we can have different standards than what American government has to institute. Those are two different things. I’m not denying the influence. Like anything, whether it’s the American law or the rules of any platform, there are rules.”
  • Tim counters:
    • “Twitter is slowly gaining too much control, from your personal ideologies, based on what you’ve researched and what you think is right over American discourse”
    • “I think we should regulate you guys because you are unelected officials running your system as you see fit against the wishes of a democratic republic, and there are people who disagree with you who are being excised from public discourse because of your ideologies. That terrifies me.”

Why are people being suspended for tweeting #learntocode (Watch)

  • Joe gives some background:
    • In response to many people losing their jobs to automation, the hashtag was created, almost as a joke/meme initially
      • People then started mocking it
  • Vijaya:
    • There was a situation a few months ago where a number of journalists were receiving a variety of tweets (some containing #learntocode and others containing other coded language (like #dayoftherope or #ovenready) which seemed to indicate harm/death to those journalists)
      • The attack was on a handful of journalists – Vijaya refers to this as “dog piling”
    • What Twitter found – a number of the accounts engaged in the behavior were ban evasion accounts (account that had been previously suspended) and that there was a targeted campaign being organized off Twitter to abuse and harass these journalists
  • Tim argues:
    • Various high profile conservatives (like the Editor in Chief of The Daily Caller), unrelated to any of the above, were suspended for tweeting nothing but “#learntocode”
    • Tim says he’s received many screenshots from other people being suspended from using the hashtag alone – why is this the case?
  • Vijaya:
    • “We made the judgment call to take down the tweets that were responding directly to these journalists saying “#learntocode” even if they didn’t have a wish of harm specifically attached to them because of what we viewed as a coordinated attempt to harass them”
    • On the banning of the high profile individuals getting suspensions for just tweeting the hashtag:
      • “There are for sure mistakes in there. I don’t think anyone is claiming we got this 100% right.”
  • Jack adds:
    • It probably also had to do with the content management team having a lack of context for what was actually happening
    • “We were probably way too aggressive when we first saw this and made mistakes”
  • Tim
    • On the suspensions – “It just feels like it’s only going in one direction”

Left Wing Tech

  • Joe brings up how most tech companies, and their employees, are comprised of people who lean towards the left
  • “We don’t ask our employees, but my guess is that many employees at tech companies are probably liberal” – Vijaya
    • Jack adds – “All those companies [Facebook, Twitter, etc.] are in the exact same region”
  • Joe brings up a good point:
    • “At some point in time, things have to get down to a human being reviewing and looking at cases. If you guys are so left wing in your staff and the area you live in…all these things…things will almost naturally lean left.”
  • Jack:
    • “If we were purely looking at the content…but a lot of this agent work is based on the behaviors, and context of the actual content”
  • Tim:
    • “Except the misgendering policy”
  • Jack:
    • “I hear the point in terms of us putting this rule forth….but we have to balance it by the fact that people are being driven away from our platform”
  • Tim:
    • “What community is and isn’t deserving of protection? Are conservatives not deserving of protection for their opinions? They’re being driven away from the platform.”
  • Jack:
    • “I want to focus on individuals and increasing the absolute number of people who have the opportunity to speak on the platform in the first place.”

A Monologue from Jack

  • “The reason I’m going on all these podcasts and having these conversations is because we need to learn and get feedback and pay attention to where the technology is going”
  • “Technology today is enabling content to live forever in a way that was not possible before” – specifically blockchain tech
  • “I believe a lot of our value in the future….not today – we have tons of work to do…is to take a strong stance of, ‘We are going to be a company that, given this entire corpus of conversation and content within the world, is going to promote healthy public conversation.’ That’s what we’re going to do.”
    • Jack says that Twitter’s definition of “healthy” has to be public – but they’re not there yet. 

Healthy Conversation

  • The 4 Indicators of a Healthy Conversation (according to Jack/Twitter at the moment)
    • Shared attention
      • Is a conversation generally shared around the same objects or is it disparate? Is the conversation focused on the same thing?
      • More shared attention will lead to healthier conversation
    • Shared reality
      • Is everyone sharing the same facts?
    • Receptivity
      • Are participants receptive to debate, people expressing their opinions etc.
      • Jack says Twitter has the most grasp on this today – “We can determine and predict when someone might walk away from a Twitter conversation because they feel it’s toxic
    • Variety of Perspective
      • Are we seeing the full spectrum of any topic being talked about?

What about roads to redemption? Is there a path for people getting back to the platform once they’ve been banned?

  • Jack:
    • “The whole purpose behind the temporary suspensions is to at least give people pause and think about why and how they violated our particular rules”
  • Vijaya:
    • Twitter is working on a VERY simplified version of the Twitter rules (that’s only 2 pages), written in plain English, with examples, to really help people understand them
    • Twitter is thinking about the “road to redemption” idea – it’s “on the roadmap”
    • “I think we agree philosophically that permanent bans are an EXTREME case scenario and it shouldn’t be one of our regularly used tools in our tool chest. How we do that is something we’re talking about today.”
  • Jack adds:
    • “I don’t think, over time, a permanent ban promotes health [of the platform]”

More on Banning

  • Tim brings up the fact how Periscope uses a content moderation jury system, and suggests Twitter do the same
  • Jack:
    • Twitter actually is experimenting with something similar…
    • When a post is flagged based on machine learning algorithms (currently in the testing stage) (or reported), the post is sent to a small jury of random Twitter users, and they’re asked – “Is this something you believe goes against the terms of service or is this something you believe should be allowed on the platform”
    • Those people can vote yes/no, or decide if they even want to participate
  • Tim:
    • “Here I am looking at you both [Jack and Vijaya] who have this tremendous power over whether or not someone can get elected. You can choose to ban someone and tell me all day and night you have a reason for doing it, and I just have to trust you. That’s terrifying.”
  • Vijaya:
    • “That’s why we’re taking the time to build transparency into what we’re doing, and that’s what we’re trying to do – by being on this podcast and by building it into the product itself”

Twitter by Country

  • Twitter is blocked in Iran
  • Twitter has a “per country takedown” – so content might not be visible within that country but visible to the rest of the world
  • Every 6 months, Twitter publishes a transparency report which details every single request they get from every single government around the world, and the content they’re asked to remove
  • Tim adds:
    • “If you enforce your values, which are basically liberal, you’re enforcing those rules on the rest of the world who use the service. This is enforcing other cultures to adhere to your rules.”

The Jacob Wohl Ban (Watch)

  • This discussion wasn’t all that interesting, but it’s linked if you want to watch

Twitter Features

  • Twitter is experimenting with a new feature which allows users (a “host” of a thread/conversation) to hide replies. They want to be really transparent with this:
    • Someone will be able to see if a comment was moderated by the “host” (those moderated comments will be viewable to the public with a few clicks)
  • The problems with “blocking”
    • Someone gets a notification that you’ve blocked them (and this might just anger them and incite them to do whatever..)
    • They can log out of Twitter and just look at your tweets on the web
  • Twitter has a “not safe for work (NSFW)” switch that you can turn on/off
  • You can turn off Twitter’s ranking of your timeline by importance and instead see tweets in chronological order

The Antifa and Proud Boys Case (Watch)

  • Same, not all that interesting

Why was Carl Benjamin banned (aka Sargon of Akkad)? (Watch)

  • There were numerous strikes:
    • A tweet saying – “Fuck white people, kill all men, die scum…none of the above qualify as hate speech”
    • A specific tweet targeting someone else including a Jewish hate slur
    • A tweet to someone else saying – “This is how I know one day I’ll be throwing you from a helicopter. You’re the same kind of malignant cancer. Don’t forget it.”
    • In a sense – all of these fall under the realm of “targeted harassment” which Twitter is very against

Wrapping Up

  • Jack:
    • “I think the most important thing we need to do, as Vijaya said, is to shine a bunch of light on what we’re doing, make sure people know where we stand and where we’re trying to go, what bridges we might need to build to get from the current state to the future state, and be open about the fact that we’re not going to get to a perfect answer. It’s just going to be steps and steps and steps….We need to be able to experiment very quickly and take in all these feedback loops, and integrate them much faster.”
    • “We’ve decided that physical safety and the admission of off platform ramifications is critical for us…we want to focus on the physical safety aspect.”
  • Tim:
    • “I just feel like you’re going to do what needs to be done. I think what you’re doing is wrong, and ultimately nothing’s going to change.”
    • “I’m looking at what Twitter is doing as very wrong. It’s oppressive and ideologically driven.”
  • Jack:
    • “My intention is to build a platform that gives as many people as possible the opportunity to freely express themselves”

Random

  • Twitter has a rule that if you’re a parody account, you need to indicate it’s a parody account in the bio
  • Twitter is a global company – 75% of Twitter users are located outside the U.S. 
  • Twitter does not read direct messages unless someone reports a direct message they’ve received
  • Posting porn on Twitter is not a violation of the rules
  • Jack recently appeared on The Sean Hannity Show
  • Twitter is 13 years old
  • It’s been reported that a Saudi Prince owns a decent portion of Twitter
  • Joe – “I’m very liberal. Except for the second amendment – that’s the only thing I disagree with a lot of liberals on.”
  • Joe does not moderate any of his Youtube video comments

These notes were edited by RoRoPa Editing Services

Bookmark
Facebooktwitterredditmail