Yes, that's why one does the right thing *and* has an attorney. ;-)
--
M. Edward (Ed) Borasky
http://borasky-research.net http://twitter.com/znmeb
"A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems." - Paul Erdos
Quoting "Papa.Coen" :
Of course, Twitter is not a secure means of co
Of course, Twitter is not a secure means of communication. You know
that, I know that. How about the majority of Twitter users? I think
you could imagine the personal harm you could get from insulting
tweets, spamming on your behalf or even setting pornographic images as
your avatar. People are get
Agreed completely. I understand why people want scope for permissions ala
Facebook, but I quite like the way Twitter is.
The whole big issue here is that people seem to think DM's are a sacred medium
for secure communication when that simply isn't the case. A DM is just a normal
tweet directed
Any models consisting of more then three levels of permission is too
complicated. Read, write, and delete are the levels of permission in their
most pure form. Delete is important because otherwise every single
application that just needs to post a tweet can delete *all* of you data
with a few simp
> - The possibility to ask for (by the app) and grant (by the user) a
> more fine grained level of authorization (more than just read/write
> only)
Totally agreed!. Specifically, I want:
1) One time tweet WRITE
2) Ongoing tweet WRITE
3) Non-public READ
3) Non-DM READ
4) Full READ
5) Profile and