4 ms·
His account was suspended many times. It wasn't just banned out of nowhere. Twitter hasn't released information surrounding the ban. Just a brief, very general
by odonnellryan 10y ago
His account was suspended many times. It wasn't just banned out of nowhere.
Twitter hasn't released information surrounding the ban. Just a brief, very general, statement. Makes sense to me they don't want to spread news that could be considered libel/slander.
If they say "Milo did this, this is why he was banned" now it's open to opinion. "Did this" is an opinion, and now suddenly Twitter says an individual did something.
Twitter gains nothing by clarifying (in the eyes of their lawyers) so they didn't. Why get sued over this?
- Chris2048 10y ago> It wasn't just banned out of nowhere This doesn't have much to do with my point - The final ban was based on LJ. If you're going to take the "Descartes's Demon" defence, it works both ways: We don't know if twitter banned Milo for other reasons, but we also don't know if "He was banned because he was harassing people" by the same measure.
- odonnellryan 10y ago> We don't know if twitter banned Milo for other reasons, but we also don't know if "He was banned because he was harassing people" by the same measure. This is the exact point I'm trying to make. It doesn't matter why he was banned, Twitter can ban anyone. As long as they didn't ban him because he was a part of a protected group, it's kosher.
- Chris2048 10y ago> This is the exact point I'm trying to make My original point simply points out Milo was not banned for personally harassing anyone, nothing else.
- odonnellryan 10y agoThen what are you trying to discuss?
- Chris2048 10y ago>> He was banned because he was harassing people > No he wasn't. Twitter claimed he incited other people to harass LJ.