Reply to post: So... who?

Twitter tries to lure brands back with spend-matching scheme

Trigun Silver badge

So... who?

Out of interest: I'm interested in knowing which version of free speech which would be acceptable and who people think should be the arbiter?

I.e. Who gets to decide when something is a joke or not, whether something is hate speech or not and who protects us from censorship along political partisan lines? Because clearly people seem to feel that someone must decide, but who in this incredibly (and depresingly) toxic, tribalised world that we now find ourselves is even-handed enough to do this?

If many feel that the current version of twitter isn't good and an equal number of people think that the previous one wasn't good either, then who/what should be and how do you guard against corruption - particularly from your own biases?

Or should we turn off the servers & wipe the backups (and do the same for facebook et al)?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon