After reading this, I have not changed my stance on this issue (which I commented on over on getsatisfaction.com), but obviously Twitter needed to remain more consistent on this issue.

Comparing Twitter to Flickr (in terms of capital) can be a bit unfair. Comparing their ToS, when Twitter said they used Flickr’s as a template, is a bit more on a level playing field.

Even still, how far should a ToS go to protect the user before they contact the proper authorities. I do not condone any online harassment, and this person that made threats again Ariel needs to go away. But at what point does the company need to take responsibility for every word, phrase or slander statement that gets posted in a 140 character message?

I see Twitter’s position. Do they treat themselves like someone running a phpBBS site or are they looking at the bigger picture and being more than just a labeled community? I see Twitter more as a communication platform than a community. Sure people can sign up, but what about the various user controls? They are very similar to IM: block, approval before following (protected). At what point did Ariel’s stalker get past these protections? Are they that weak that someone can simply just sign up at random?

I honestly feel bad that Ariel had to go through all of this, and in the end, Twitter should have just given in instead of getting bad press and letting Ariel vent publicly in her repeated requests to Twitter.

But Twitter, in their defense, looked at the bigger picture. Instead of starting down a trend which would bring everyone out of the woodworks to “someone called me a name, ban them”, they have left free discourse alone and continue to be a content provider instead of a big brother moderator over every utterance of a vulgar phrase.

After reading this, I have not changed my stance on this issue (which I commented on over on getsatisfaction.com), but obviously Twitter needed to remain more consistent on this issue.

Comparing Twitter to Flickr (in terms of capital) can be a bit unfair. Comparing their ToS, when Twitter said they used Flickr’s as a template, is a bit more on a level playing field.

Even still, how far should a ToS go to protect the user before they contact the proper authorities. I do not condone any online harassment, and this person that made threats again Ariel needs to go away. But at what point does the company need to take responsibility for every word, phrase or slander statement that gets posted in a 140 character message?

I see Twitter’s position. Do they treat themselves like someone running a phpBBS site or are they looking at the bigger picture and being more than just a labeled community? I see Twitter more as a communication platform than a community. Sure people can sign up, but what about the various user controls? They are very similar to IM: block, approval before following (protected). At what point did Ariel’s stalker get past these protections? Are they that weak that someone can simply just sign up at random, ignoring any settings?

I honestly feel bad that Ariel had to go through all of this, and in the end, Twitter should have just given in instead of getting bad press and letting Ariel vent publicly in her repeated requests to Twitter.

But Twitter, in their defense, looked at the bigger picture. Instead of starting a trend which would bring everyone out of the woodworks with their “someone called me a name, ban them” complaints, they chose to not disrupt free discourse and continue to be a content provider instead of a big brother moderator over every utterance of a vulgar phrase.

I can’t think of a start-up that’s had more support. But this I feel may turn the tide where downtime has not. This situation is extremely disappointing. From Jack’s mismanagement, Ev’s seemingly pushing blame on the victim and Biz’s scrambling to cover their collective asses, it screams severe mismanagement (and highlights that maybe some of the other things we’ve let slide by were warning signs/red flags).

Twitter is a community foremost, as well as a communication tool. And you’re right that they need to set the standard for community response (and we hope this wasn’t it). A community manager is a great start – but a Community Advocate on the management team, not on the Board but maybe reporting to them – is also a role they should look at.

Were there to have been a lawsuit – I can imagine that the community would have stepped in with financial support to offset the legal fees. If there had ever been a need for crisis management this was the time, prior to Biz’s post.

I’ve fallen a bit out of love with Twitter, the kind of moment you feel when a relationship takes that fateful downturn. Hopefully, the Twitter team takes this as an opportunity to learn from this misstep and really think about what the TOS should stand for. Hint – it’s not to cover themselves but a policy that protects and supports their community.