I am writing using google translate. I think it's pretty bad English, but please forgive me.
As you know, a lot has changed since Elon Musk acquired Twitter.
Previously, the situation was as follows.
Anti-Japanese are dominating the site.
The management of Twitter has been arbitrarily blocking users' access to the site, such as shadowbans, etc.
The site is now a propaganda platform for the far-left media, although it claims to be liberal.
Well, they are in the process of improving their cash flow by laying off a large number of personnel, etc., which caused the above situation.
As a countermeasure, I would like to share my perspective from a Japanese user's point of view.
The three problems with Twitter Inc. would be as follows.
The cost of the interference deteriorated the company's business.
The cost of the interference has caused the company's business to deteriorate.
As a result of the curation process that was conducted with an eye toward "political correctness," overhead costs that contributed nothing to sales continued to grow, and the company fell into a negative spiral of worsening business.
I decided to write this article from a Japanese point of view, "How about this?
We do not burn books. We do not burn books, therefore we do not burn words or expressions. We do not burn books because it is a Nazi, anti-democratic act.
Heinrich Heine, a German poet of Jewish descent who was burned by Nazi Germany, once wrote: "Whoever burns books will eventually burn people.
He who burns books will soon be burning people."
(from Heine's play "Armandzor")
-----------------------------------------------------------------
According to Article 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act (1996), providers (platform services such as SNS and ISPs) shall
(i) In principle, they are not responsible for information transmitted by third parties, and
(ii) Providers shall not be held liable for actions taken in good faith and voluntarily to restrict access to harmful content, such as removal of such content. (iii) Platform services and ISPs shall not be held responsible in principle for information transmitted by third parties.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Even when it comes to complying with the illegality of telecommunications products, the American Democratic Party types "who love to get the pleasure of mounting righteousness by imposing it" have kept up the pressure both economically and politically.
Twitter does not want to be responsible according to their demands, but does not want to be told this or that.
So they have been operating arbitrarily, clearly deviating even from the standards they themselves have established.
In short, they have been abusing their customers by pandering to those who mount the public with political correctness and the like. This is not the way to run a successful business.
Perhaps the previous CEO, Jack Dorsey, wanted to get the best of both worlds. Perhaps it was because there was no other way, but that kind of naive thinking never works.
As a result, Twitter's business situation continued to deteriorate.
To the "righteous pretenders" with Heine's words about the Nazis burning books, "Do you want to burn books?" and ask them broadly, "Do you want to burn books?
They will never answer that they do, but will try to mislead you with all sorts of deceptions and substitutions, but the conclusion will remain exactly the same: "We burn books and we do not burn words.
They will insist, "It is right for us to burn books, to burn words and expressions.”
Incidentally, both Nazi Germany and the Communist Party justified the same actions with exactly the same arguments. If the actions are the same, the content would be the same.
To put it in Christian terms, "rightness" should be chosen by each person according to the "power to know good and evil" that is within all people.
This is why God did not take away the power to know right from wrong when He expelled Adam and Eve from Eden.
To "impose righteousness" on everyone and force them to follow it, without letting the "power to know right from wrong" be the judge, is an act of "disobeying God.
Those who do so are the "false workers" described in Corinthians, "servants of Satan who pretend to serve righteousness.
Political correctness" is even more pernicious than Nazism.
It smacks of communism's goal of "achieving a communist society through the destruction of social norms.
There is an Islamic saying that "the way to God is as many lives as there are lives." Likewise, "there are as many ways to rightness as there are lives.
Do not listen to the righteousness of the "false workers" of the Bible. Do not give them even a speck of dust of success.
The way to tell the difference is simple.
Whether or not they try to impose their "righteousness" on you?
That is the only way to tell.
The best way to do that is to cover the mouths of those who do it, kick them in the butt, and knock them out. They just want the pleasure of seeing someone else being pushed and giving in.
It takes time to really embrace what is right.
After all, when Japan proposed the "abolition of racial discrimination" at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, the Western nations rejected it.
Well, times being times. It was commonplace for Bernard Shaw to say, "Discrimination against Jews is a gentleman's (or lady's) prerogative.
In the United States, the Senate even passed a resolution that the United States would not join the League of Nations if the proposal to eliminate racial discrimination was adopted.
It took until the Civil Rights Movement of 1954. But even after that, Americans who want to enjoy the pleasure of mounting someone else's racism continue to do so endlessly.
That is probably why the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan twice. Because if you're not white, you don't care.
To the smug Americans, God will judge a person's righteousness and sins, and there is no such thing as "heaven without question because you are an American.
There is no such thing as "heaven without question because you are an American. and then there will be a lot of white-skinned Americans in a place they don't want to be.
Let's go back to the story.
They want it like the urban legend goes, "Once a chimpanzee learns a certain action, it will not stop doing it until it dies.In reality, chimpanzees” are not like that.
They are obsessed with mounting someone like a ”chimpanzee that, once it learns a certain action, will not stop doing it until it dies.”
Let's substitute "X" for "chimpanzee" because "a chimpanzee that learns a certain act and never stops doing it until it dies" is too much.
We should call them "MountiX," meaning "X obsessed with mounting.”
What is needed for normalization?
This is simple: make it a good platform for a large number of users. This is the only way.
In other words, make it a worthless and uncomfortable place for a toxic minority of righteous people.
Outside of Japan, there are "freezers" who report and freeze the tweets of certain users years ago.
Therefore, I would like to change the rules for reporting.
First, unfreeze all current frozen members unless they are clearly criminal, threatening, etc.
Second, change the handling of reports and the rules.
Accepting the report.
The response is first divided by the time stamp of the content of the accepted report.
Personally, I would prefer more than a week, but up to 4 weeks; 28 days would be fine.
Then, we will notify the public that the call in question has been received, though not by a jury system. Vote.
As "the voice of the people is the voice of heaven," we will send out a request for a vote to determine the validity of the call regarding the statements made during the time period.
The vote will be twofold
"Is it appropriate to report this statement and why?"
"Does the person who reported this statement intend to hunt words and expressions?"
If correct, the "reported party" will be marked as having made a problematic statement, and the statement will be prohibited from being erased as evidence.
The statement should include the following text, as with sensitive images, etc.
This statement was reported for 00 reasons and has been voted to be a valid report. If you wish to view it, please select "View Statement" at your own risk.
After the user has seen the statement, he/she is asked to vote on whether he/she thinks it is a valid report. The result of the vote will be displayed with the statement before viewing the details.
The results of the vote will be displayed along with the statement before the details are viewed, and no freeze will be applied except for obvious criminal activity.
The problematic statements will be kept for voting and for the AI to judge.
Also, to leave what evil looks like, to hinder the purpose of those who "continue to magnify evil for their own convenience".
In the case of a vote that is not valid, the number of invalid calls will be recorded in the caller's account information.
Similarly, if the second vote is determined to be "word-hunting and expression-hunting," the marker will be placed on the caller as a "false worker" who is a word-hunter or expression-hunter.
The mark of a book to be burned would be appropriate.
On the side of the reported person, mark him or her as a "free blue bird targeted by the book burner.
We will make them uncomfortable and docile by "not giving them the pleasure of word-hunting and marking them for what they really are" those who are the cause of Twitter's uncomfortableness.
It will also allow them to be sorted by their marks for automatic response to the marked, which will be discussed later.
If we make this change, the Biden Democrats will say this and that.
Well, the gist of it is "Our word hunt. Expression hunting is good, so don't get in the way on the grounds of freedom of expression" is all they will say.
If they say.
We don't burn books. So we don't burn the words and expressions in the book. Burning words and expressions is a Nazi-like act. Human history has shown that this is a Nazi act, no matter what the reasons for it are. And as an American company in a free and democratic country, we do not do Nazi things.
I would reply.
Changes should be made so that "shadowbans" and the like cannot be done, even if they are operated.
The path to restructuring will be paved by transforming the platform into a "fair platform" that does not create the groundwork that leads to such word-hunting.
If the company insists on keeping it, it should be required to disclose all information in accordance with ISO 26000, the international standard for social responsibility.
Liberal people will not be averse to compliance with "international standards for social responsibility" just because it is inconvenient for them.
After all, they themselves use "social responsibility" as a reason for mounting people.
It is common sense as a member of society that you should not make an exception.
Multiple account issues
Make visible the multiple accounts that users have.
Eliminate the state of large numbers of accounts that are either dormant or disposable and left for specific speech operations.
Limit the number of accounts a user can have for free.
Three accounts per user is a reasonable limit, but the actual decision by the management may differ.
Tie user information to biometric data or a unique U.S. "social security number," for example.
If fingerprint authentication is used, it may be necessary to keep all ten fingers as a measure against malicious users.
Voting, blocking, and muting should be done on a user, and should cover all of the user's accounts.
This means that only one vote can be cast even if there are a hundred accounts, and at the same time, it is a measure to make it impossible for the annoying user mentioned above to misbehave, except for users who have blocked him or her with another account.
Three or more accounts should not be allowed except when they are tied to a user for a fee, such as "$1 per month per account".
The same conditions should be applied to corporations, but they should be able to be separated by tags such as "advertisement," "public relations," "sweepstakes," etc., depending on the content of their statements.
All accounts that do not meet the above conditions will be placed in a dormant status. They will not be able to be used unless they are linked to a user.
The Bot Problem
The bot problem is a headache. However, from a different perspective, it also means that "bots on Twitter are in demand.
In principle, the use of all bots must be paid for, and operation from environments other than the one provided by the Twitter vehicle is prohibited. In the case of external users, the bot must have administrative privileges so that audits can be performed at all times.
Twitter will constantly monitor the bot's operating logic and source code, and will be able to stop the bot if necessary.
Bot should be marked as a bot, and restrictions such as not being able to vote should be placed on the bot.
If a bot and its user do not comply with the above, all accounts associated with the user will be immediately frozen and the user will not be able to create new accounts.
Introduction of tabs
Like the introduction of tabs in browsers, make it mandatory for general users and corporate users to tag advertisements so that they will be displayed in corporate tabs.
Sell the right to display detailed customization and the right to prevent ads from being displayed for $1 per person per month.
If a certain number of ads are viewed and rated, the right to hide tabs and ads for the following month may be offered free of charge.
Introduction of new processing
Mask (tentative name) processing
Add a third measure to mute and block against users.
We propose the following for users to whom masks are applied.
Masked users' comments will not be visible to the users to whom the mask is applied.
The masked user's comments will be visible to the masked user. However, they cannot vote, reply, etc.
It is possible to report a masked user. However, in this case, the fact that the report was made by the masked user will be displayed when the user is judged.
No quoted tweets
Prohibition of quotation tweeting of one's own remarks to a specific user.
Prohibit quoted tweets to other users in a specific thread. You can choose all thread participants or a specific one.
This is a countermeasure against users who "do not reply to others properly, but try to cover it up by forcibly cutting off the conversation with quotes".
The masking process should also be able to be done with marks on the other person's account.
We suggest that the following marks be targeted
All accounts owned by users with the word-hunting mark.
After that, we would like to have the "for polycopyright" and "not for polycopyright" marks set on the accounts so that those who are "for polycopyright" cannot see them.
People who think they are conscious enough to agree with polycole should not go crazy because they can't mount the group because they can't see those who don't agree with polycole.
They are conscious, so they wouldn't be so mean and shallow.
Those who are pro-police will have a comfortable environment where those who aren't can't see them. They wouldn't be screeching if they couldn't mount it.
By making it more comfortable and convenient for the users by making it uncomfortable for a few annoying people, I hope those who have put up with the arrogance of those who pretend to be righteous and remain users will be rewarded.
I've attached a link to the Japanese version.
