3 ms·

Would you ask that question of literally anything else? There are twitter accounts for all sorts of things. Agree with it or not, the AZ audit is a real thing t

Would you ask that question of literally anything else? There are twitter accounts for all sorts of things. Agree with it or not, the AZ audit is a real thing that is happening in Arizona. It having a twitter account is in no way unusual. It's hard for me to believe that this account was suspended for any real "violation". I guess they will say that the people running the audit are spreading misinformation, but the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true, so isn't twitter taking a side here? Is that ok? I don't think so. If the audit has no basis in reality, as many claim, then it will fail. Why is it so dangerous to allow people to watch that happen?

bellyfullofbac 5y ago
> but the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true In the dictionary definition, yes. But the problem with this "audit" is filled with such corrupt cast of characters that their results can not be trusted. Sadly they're abusing the name of the process to be able to claim that their results will be authoritive. > If the audit has no basis in reality, as many claim, then it will fail. And who determines that it's a failure? An audit of the audit? Ironically them making a crooked "audit" allows them to be able to turn around and say the people auditing them are the crooked ones. A meta-audit also has to be financed, and the people living in reality-based world might not even be that bothered enough to do so, which results in this fake audit be the truth in the "alternative facts" half of the society. Not that I'm arguing that Twitter is right in banning them...
- jimmygrapes 5y ago
  I don't know anything about this audit other than that someone is doing some kind of audit in Arizona regarding the 2020 U.S. election. Can you please clarify what you mean by people involved being untrustworthy, and/or other arguments against this process? I honestly fail to see any problem with auditing election results, since as far as I know there is no actual remedy regardless of the results, and it seems to me like verifying accurate results is a good thing. Of course if there is some corruption, fraud, or similar going on with ANY kind of auditor, I'd like to know.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - iudqnolq 5y ago
    All coverage of the audit by reputable news sources has explained why it's a joke. Here's one example > The “forensic audit,” as Senate GOP leaders are calling their review, is overseen by Cyber Ninjas, a small computer security firm with no election experience before Trump began questioning the 2020 results. Its CEO, Doug Logan, spread false conspiracy theories about the election before he was hired to lead the Arizona review. https://apnews.com/article/technology-joe-biden-arizona-government-and-politics-ap-fact-check-0e7fad7e5bdf02d953c6b90a474267cc https://apnews.com/article/technology-joe-biden-arizona-gove...
jhayward 5y ago
> the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true It is abundantly clear that this is not what the 'audit' is about. The effort is about overturning the results of a legitimate election through propaganda and lies.

bellyfullofbac 5y ago

> but the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true In the dictionary definition, yes. But the problem with this "audit" is filled with such corrupt cast of characters that their results can not be trusted. Sadly they're abusing the name of the process to be able to claim that their results will be authoritive. > If the audit has no basis in reality, as many claim, then it will fail. And who determines that it's a failure? An audit of the audit? Ironically them making a crooked "audit" allows them to be able to turn around and say the people auditing them are the crooked ones. A meta-audit also has to be financed, and the people living in reality-based world might not even be that bothered enough to do so, which results in this fake audit be the truth in the "alternative facts" half of the society. Not that I'm arguing that Twitter is right in banning them...

jimmygrapes 5y ago
I don't know anything about this audit other than that someone is doing some kind of audit in Arizona regarding the 2020 U.S. election. Can you please clarify what you mean by people involved being untrustworthy, and/or other arguments against this process? I honestly fail to see any problem with auditing election results, since as far as I know there is no actual remedy regardless of the results, and it seems to me like verifying accurate results is a good thing. Of course if there is some corruption, fraud, or similar going on with ANY kind of auditor, I'd like to know.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- iudqnolq 5y ago
  All coverage of the audit by reputable news sources has explained why it's a joke. Here's one example > The “forensic audit,” as Senate GOP leaders are calling their review, is overseen by Cyber Ninjas, a small computer security firm with no election experience before Trump began questioning the 2020 results. Its CEO, Doug Logan, spread false conspiracy theories about the election before he was hired to lead the Arizona review. https://apnews.com/article/technology-joe-biden-arizona-government-and-politics-ap-fact-check-0e7fad7e5bdf02d953c6b90a474267cc https://apnews.com/article/technology-joe-biden-arizona-gove...

jhayward 5y ago

> the whole point of the audit is to figure out what's true It is abundantly clear that this is not what the 'audit' is about. The effort is about overturning the results of a legitimate election through propaganda and lies.