The psychological impact of "I'll drink your blood out of your c--- after I rip it open" [1] is very different from that of recruiter spam.

[1] https://twitter.com/femfreq/status/504718160902492160

Wow, Twitter allows this content on their network?

Obviously not. The account was deleted and banned shortly after the tweets were made. Note that that screenshot was taken about 3 minutes after the account was created.

It's basically just Internet trolls registering Twitter accounts behind proxies and saying the edgiest things they can think of to stir the pot.

"It's just trolls" is a mixture of monstering (it's them not us) and trivializing.

This is misogynist male supremacist terrorism. Twittering threats of violent sexual assault is like phoning in bomb threats - even if you don't have any explosives, the communication itself is an attack.

Don't call it terrorism. We don't give time to terrorists, ignoring them is the best solution; giving them more attention, yelling loudly for them to stop, and attacking them in retaliation are what terrorists want you to do.

Perhaps Twitter needs a probationary period for new accounts from suspicious IP blocks, and some content moderation at that time.

High profile accounts could opt in to this moderation for tweets that @them or DM them.or whatever.

"its all in the mind of the receiver (aka psychological)"

Two points:

1) Except when it isn't. 2) Isn't that enough? What are we, robots? It's true that some people might be able to treat the two things the same and not be affected, but they're a tiny minority. Harm is harm, even if you think that everyone should have thicker skin.

@yummyfajitas - it appears that all of your posts are dead right now. I'm not clear if you've been banned after many downvotes or what, but the last several posts are all dead now.

Yummyfajitas isn't banned. Some of his comments are being flagged by users.

I just noticed that I now see [flagkilled] instead of [dead] some places. Is that new? And if so, I'm guessing it was not applied retroactively?

Just curious, because it looks like you're trying to be more transparent and I applaud that.

Yes, it's a week or so old and means that user flags killed a story or comment.

I don't understand your question about retroactiveness; can you explain?

Has there been a change to the number of downvotes needed to make a post "dead"? I've had showdead on forever, and it feels like I'm seeing many more posts that have been deaded by voting alone.

Essentially I'm asking if it applies to all posts or only posts after the feature was added.

Thanks for clarifying. I was wondering if he'd tripped something automatic.

The implication that psychological damage is not "real" damage is false.