zlacker

Spam is an intractable problem for any so called free speech absolutist. One person's spam could be another person's desired message. But if a platform is overrun with spam, it becomes unusable for genuine discourse.

Maybe the biggest challenge is defining what constitutes "spam." While some cases seem clear-cut (e.g., repeated identical messages from bots, malware, phishing), others are quite subjective. Subtle marketing? Aggressive marketing? Repetitive but sincere advocacy for a cause? Repetitive but insincere trolling? Repetitive but sincere trolling?

All this seems rather obvious, so I was kind of surprised to see how many people bought into Elon's vision for Twitter, it was never workable.

>>jquery+(OP)
Of course spam is also tracible. There might be difficulties for government to regulate it because of the legal context, but the solution is to hand the decision of filtering it to the user as long as that user doesn't decide for others.