Now, for the record, I don’t use Twitter. I like my privacy. I have no reason to twit about what I do 24 hours a day. And, unless you’re endangering someone, I really don’t care what you’re doing either. It has no appeal to me. Apparently, Norman uses it. This comes as no surprise to me as he does seem to be rather full of himself. But let’s see what he has to say.
“Although they pretend to have standards, if you report an antagonist, you are most likely to get a ‘not our problem’ response.”
Norman has a tendency to claim that anyone that doesn’t worship the ground on which he walks is an “antagonist.” My personal guess, as I don’t know the details but am familiar with Norman’s behavior, is that he filed one of his “poor me” complaints against someone who dared to disagree with him; the administrators at Twitter looked into it, found that it had no merit, and told him not to waste their time. Strangely, this is the same guy that calls himself a “soldier” for Jesus. He reminds me a bit of the Sir Robin character from Monty Python’s Quest for the Holy Grail. Indeed, he’s even worse. He picks fights and expects people not to fight back.
“I have even received threats (including an unemployed alcoholic atheist who tried to tell one threatener where he thought I lived, the [deleted], but Twitter was more than happy to let the troglodytes go on about their merry ways.”
A note to Norman: Nobody cares where exactly that you live. You’re not that important. You probably should be living in the local state penitentiary. But no one wants to deal with you face-to-face.
“Oh, Norman thinks I’m lying about Twitter doing nothing? (Typical. For him, almost everything I say appears to be a lie, even with supporting links.) Well, too bad. People will just have to believe me and my screenshots”
Once again, Norman is forgetting that he is Norman. When he does provide “supporting links,” they tend to be links to himself. And he poses as an “atheist” so that he can construct his screenshots, like he did with his recent “stupid atheist” post. The fact is that people don’t believe him. His track record on honesty is terrible.
“Perhaps you’ll be more inclined to believe the New York Police Department. Some jerk was making threats that he was going to shoot up a theater in the style of the Aurora, Colorado shootings. The police wanted the information on who was making the threats and made an emergency request, but the weasels at Twitter refused to comply!”
Amazingly, this is one instance where Norman doesn’t actually link to himself. Still, I can see where the administration could decide that the threat was not credible. I don’t want anyone giving out my personal information without a good reason that includes court oversight. If the police can just use “emergency request” as magic words to access anyone’s information that they feel like, that’s what they will do.
“Twitter even challenged a subpoena in May 2012.”
Some of us think that protecting privacy is a good thing. “Prosecutors seeking the data failed to get a court warrant based on probable cause, making an order they obtained earlier a violation of federal law and the Constitution’s prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Twitter brief argued.” Me, I’m gonna side with the people trying to protect Constitutional rights. Norman obviously doesn’t believe in the Constitution.
“If they don’t care about dealing with the big stuff, I think it’s safe to assume that they will be no help, or even a hindrance, to regular people’s rights and safety.”
Take a good look at Norman’s actual complaint. He is complaining because Twitter aggressively protected the Constitutional rights of its users. If they did what he wanted they would be a hindrance to regular people’s rights and safety.