Twitter is testing feature that restricts who can reply to tweets, and it could spell...


Posts: 5,674   +43
Staff member

Back in January, Twitter said it would be introducing a new tool that would allow users to select who can reply to their tweets. Now, the company is testing the feature with a “limited group of people globally” on Android, iOS, and the web app.

Using the feature presents a few options when posting a tweet: keeping the current default setting of allowing anyone to reply, only letting followers reply, or only allowing those who are mentioned to reply. By choosing the last option and not mentioning anyone, users are effectively turning off all replies.

The change is designed to address the platform’s long-running troll problem. “Twitter is where you go to see and talk about what’s happening,” writes Suzanne Xie, Director of Product Management at Twitter. “But sometimes, unwanted replies make it hard to have meaningful conversations.”

How much the features will stop the trolls remains to be seen. No matter what option is selected, everyone can still view, retweet, and like the tweets; they can also retweet with comment, which is a popular way of goading followers into directing abuse at someone.

The other potential problem with limited tweets is how its use might affect public figures. Back in 2017, Columbia University's Knight First Amendment Institute sued Donald Trump for blocking Twitter users, and the Court of Appeals last year upheld a ruling against the president, saying that the action was a violation of people’s First Amendment rights.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says public officials using the reply-limiting feature would be violating users’ freedom of speech in the same way that blocking them does.

“As a general matter, Twitter’s investment in user controls is a good thing. But public officials would be violating the First Amendment if they were to use this tool to block speakers on any accounts they’ve opened up for public conversation in their roles as government actors. Nor should public officials use this tool to decide who can, or can't, reply to accounts they have opened up for requests for government assistance, which may be on the rise due to COVID-19,” wrote the ACLU.

Permalink to story.



Posts: 2,666   +2,298
#1 The reason "certain politicians" like to use Twitter and Facebook is because we are only allowed to "like" or "love" comments. Rather than give us a Like/ Dislike button - which even Youtube was brave enough to do, these cowards disallow us from the simplicity of a like/dislike and make our dislike vague unless we leave a hate-filled comment.

That in and of itself encourages bullying by "certain politicians" who know that their dissent can't be seen and everything they say has to be taken at face value.

I blame the social medias for encouraging cyberbullying as much as I do "certain politicians" who do it. You're feeding a sociopath behavior.

#2 "Congress shall make no law..."

The government and any politician who represents it has no right whatsoever to censor us - or our protests. That's a negative right which the constitution denies government.

"Certain politicians" tried to block and ban dissent off of his Twitter until it was ruled unconstitutional. Now citizens post responses at will, regardless secret service and the FBI read em or not.

Being able to tell my leader "they suck" without fear of retaliation is what makes America America.

#3 Everyone, People You mention, People You Follow

These social media systems disgust me to no end. They are tailor cutting these platforms to manufacture outrage and they are creating more trolling and more cyberbullying the Lee Atwater way:

By making it more clever and more sophisticated rather than simply being truthful about its intent.
Last edited:

Uncle Al

Posts: 6,936   +5,219
A potential First Amendment violation?

Didn't we already see this with Donald Trump attempted to block people from seeing and replying to his tweet's 3 years ago?