They used the account only to announce disruptions - and didn't lock comments/replies.

So obviously on some of those posts you would see replies from people annoyed by specific disruptions.

The weird thing is that you actually need to spend time to find any replies - as most announcements didn't have replies.

And those I found only reached the "sarcastically formed hypothetical question". And still often being on point - e.g. why are there no fallback buses to cover tram/metro disruptions.

Considering all that - it seems "constant hateful messages" is at least a bit exaggerated.

It’s possible that they were getting DMs that were hateful too.

Good point about turning off replies though, seems like a one-way communication method should meet their requirements if they can set it up that way.

I've subconsciously ruled out DMs - so thanks for pointing out.

That's said, GVBs announcement was mentioning lack of supervision/moderation, and they continue to use WhatsApp - so I don't think it was Twitter/X DMs but actual replies.

And yeah you can simply set who can reply for each post on X - e.g. only mentioned users, so for their announcements basically no one.

And while there's obviously a segment of X users that are the kind you imagine also trolls on 4chan - reporting posts/replies with racism/hate/etc usually results in their temporary or even permanent ban.

"What started as a platform for dialogue and the exchange of knowledge has now become a place for hateful and polarizing messages. This does not connect with our societal values as an organization."

This, to me, seems purely political.

It seems values-based, if you assume good faith.

Some people form political identities around some values, and that will likely be seen in some opposition to this values-based action.

I don't know mate if I would get flamed all day with a smidge of death threats sprinkled in on one platform but not on others I would probably leave too.

Can someone point towards examples of those flamed/death threats/etc?

Worst I found are tweets about drivers that don't pick up travelers from a stop being called "jerks".

Are you asking because you think those examples don't exist, and if so, are open to someone showing you they do?

If you're open to someone showing you they do, would you accept their judgement in that regard, or would you want to apply your own judgement of their judgement?

More of the first - I imagine some example(s) exist. Though without finding/seeing even one of them, it's hard to think there's more than few isolated incidents.

I'm not too clear on what you were asking regarding judgment part?

I’m struggling to find evidence of what they’re alleging in news sources. It doesn’t make sense that they can’t just post announcements on Twitter and turn off replies.

> This does not connect with our societal values as an organization.

This feels quite vague and strangely worded. Is it organizational values or societal values, and what are they? All I found on their website is a somewhat generic DEI statement (https://werkenbijgvb.nl/over-gvb/diversiteit-inclusie/). Who decides what those values are for decisions like this? Or is it more like a personal/political decision made by a few employees on a marketing team?

From https://www.geenstijl.nl/5175653/GVB-stopt-met-Twitter

"Must be a decision by the non-tweeting CEO Claudia Zuiderwijk , her predecessor is now doing something in politics."

No idea of there's any truth in that. OTOH it wouldn't be first time some executive is stacking cards in favor of their pet project (GVBs Gappie app).

Maybe they could switch to 4chan for a more reasonable environment.

> Musk's X.

Why the need to indicate this in the title? Would the results be different if they used a different platform?

> Why the need to indicate this in the title?

Because X is a stupid name. Mentioning Musk along with X helps make the association between that stupid name and the man responsible for it.

Previously, this would have read "Twitter". They can't just write 'X', since everyone would assume that was a copyediting error.

(Still can't get over what a terrible rebrand that was.)