I don't know about all versions of windows, but in at least some of them you can see all the processes, you just can't directly affect ones from other users.
To me it depends somewhat on how many towers are considered high-demand. If there's only a few it's fine, but if it's virtually every tower in an urban area, that's a problem.
So why are they only doing this to people who have already paid off their phone?
For all we know she may have personal issues like a violent ex or stalker that would make that just as threatening.
You're right, I suppose the agent would probably have been willing to let them preboard as unaccompanied minors if he had been willing to pay the extra $50 apiece, slightly more than upgrading their tickets for early boarding would cost.
As I pointed out in at least some of the places that people have claimed that, she was following SW's policy. He did not have any small children and unlike Delta and some other airlines, SW doesn't allow sharing of frequent flier status.
If you included my real name and address I might take it as threatening even if no actual threat is made.
IMO, he was perfectly justified to complain about the policy or about the anonymous agent. If he wanted to complain about the agent by name, he should have filed a complaint with the airlines rather than post it for anyone to see.
She wasn't threatening arrest over a tweet, she was threatening to ask him to leave the plane over a tweet. The police were just if he refused to leave the plane once asked.
If you ask someone to leave your business (which an airplane effectively is) and they don't, they're trespassing.
Those are the rules for Delta, not SW.
Or to restrict your complaints to the policy that she enforced or at least to not include the agent's name and location in your tweet.
He was allowed on the plane, at the appropriate boarding time. Then he tweeted about a rude agent that was following company policy, giving her name and location. He was then informed that the agent felt threatened by that and would ask him to leave the plane if he didn't remove the tweet, he removed it and was allowed to fly.
Once he'd been asked to leave and didn't he would be trespassing.
It wasn't over a tweet critical of SW's policy that he was threatened, it was over a tweet that gave the agent's name and location that he was threatened. One is a reasonable reaction, the other can be seen as a potential threat to the agent.
He's a frequent flier and wanted to board his kids as such. Also, his kids were old enough that they didn't qualify as small kids.