5 ms·
Twitter banned me after publishing the JD Vance Dossier
- mksreddy 2y agoFree speech for his (Elon: Right Wing) ideology, not for everyone.
- klyrs 2y agoIt's the Big Lie time and time again: cry wolf about your opponents doing something you want to do in the near future. Keep talking about it, and get louder when you start doing it yourself, and your loyalists will keep looking the other way.
- christkv 2y agoNow do it for the other VP candidate let's see what happens. If your theory is right he should not ban it right?
- eat_veggies 2y agoonly one of the vp candidates has a dossier like this
- readthenotes1 2y agoAre you saying Harris's team didn't vet Walz, or that the Iranians didn't acquire and distribute the findings?
- mcphage 2y agoIirc the Iranians attempted to, but were unsuccessful. I have no doubt that the Harris campaign wrote up documents about each of their potential VPs.
- eeasss 2y agoHis holyness Elon
- VFIT7CTO77TOC 2y agox is a private company and it can do what it wants
- Zak 2y agoFew dispute that, though it's fair to point out the hypocrisy of its owner who loudly champions free speech on social media platforms when it suits him to do so.
- n4r9 2y agoIt's not that the banning itself is wrong. It highlights the hypocrisy of Musk's claims about free speech.
- VFIT7CTO77TOC 2y ago[flagged]
- n4r9 2y agoI've never liked Twitter and have never used it. Doesn't mean I can't criticise it!
- EricE 2y agoPublishing someone's social security number is "free speech"?
- addandsubtract 2y agoWhen everything is supposed to be "free speech", then yes. That's exactly why total free speech is a red herring.
- nataliste 2y agohe can be as hypocritical as he wants; it's his platform
- 2y ago
- reedf1 2y agoFree speech on privately owned platforms will always be an illusion at best.
- diebeforei485 2y agoTheir rules are fairly clear about hack-and-leak content. A lot of other social media platforms don't allow it either.
- CBLT 2y agoTFA didn't mention what private information was contained in the dossier. Is it his street address? SSN?
- pnw 2y agoYes, his current home address is listed on one of the first pages.
- slantedview 2y agoIt's also listed on dozens of election websites as part of his FEC filings, and is in no way private.
- pnw 2y agoCan you provide a link? I just looked at a few FEC filings for Vance and they list a PO Box or an office in Ohio, not his home address.
- codexb 2y agoThe journalist here is not being entirely truthful. While much of the information that the campaign used to vet JD Vance was public, not all of it was, and the internal comments are definitely not public information. It's a bit like saying hacked internal emails are public if they are discussing public topics. The reason the media generally doesn't publish hacked documents is so they don't create an incentive for people to hack documents. It's the same reason why many media companies won't publish pictures and sometimes names of mass shooters and child suicides. You're free to do it. But many media companies don't do it for legitimate practical, ethical, and moral reasons.
- readthenotes1 2y agoSilly me. I thought the reason why the media did not publish hacked documents it's because it is difficult to verify their provenance.
- clipsy 2y ago> You're free to do it. But many media companies don't do it for legitimate practical, ethical, and moral reasons. But Twitter’s current owner has explicitly attacked the media for exactly this reason, and has claimed repeatedly and self-aggrandizingly to value free speech above such concerns.
- codexb 2y agoHe attacked them for censoring opposing viewpoints for political and ideological reasons. That's a far cry from hacked personal information. I admit, it is a bit of a grey line, but neither of these cases are particularly close to the line.
- clipsy 2y agoInfo from Hunter Biden’s laptop was a focus of the “Twitter Files” and explicitly involved information being taken unethically and possibly illegally from a laptop at a repair shop.
- ahahahahah 2y ago
- aeturnum 2y agoOf course you write this post to have the discourse - but it is Elon's website and he can do what he wants with it I suppose. I don't think any era of Twitter has had very consistent moderation decisions and I don't think it matters much in any era - either now or when conservatives were making hay about it around covid. It seems clear that the prevailing political views of the owner are influential, but not dictatorial, and that's about as good as it gets in our world. That said I am all for yelling at elon to try to get him to change the policies, which works a lot of the time, and seems like a pretty reasonable way to manage the margins of these things.
- ChrisArchitect 2y agoRelated: X (Twitter) blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41662702 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41662702
- themaninthedark 2y agoAs far as I know Twitter is still HQ in California and the current laws is: The legal definition of posting harmful information on the internet under California Penal Code 653.2 is as follows: You used an electronic communication device to distribute electronically, publish, email, hyperlink or make available for downloading personal identifying information or an electronic message of a harassing nature about another person; You did so without that person’s consent; You did so with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his/her safety or the safety of his/her immediate family; You did so for the purpose of imminently causing that other person unwanted physical contact, injury or harassment; andThe personal identifying information or message you shared would be likely to incite or produce that unwanted physical contact, injury or harassment.
- mmooss 2y agoThat must apply to private people. Obviously you can post leaks about public figures, without their consent, with the intent they be harassed. That is the most important form of free speech - criticising political candidates.
- mmooss 2y ago> X says that I’ve been suspended for “violating our rules against posting private information,” citing a tweet linking to my story about the JD Vance dossier. Be aware that it fits an ongoing to campaign to limit free speech, especially in regard to goverment officials and public figures. They want to make it illegal or impossible to criticize government or powerful people, both of which are the foundations of free speech - those are the most important forms of speech. They approach it in multiple ways that I'm aware of: * They want the Supreme Court to change their precedent - as the current court has done many times for other areas of law - in the 1964 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan case, which established that public officials only have a claim if they prove the critical speech was false and also was published with "actual malice"; that is "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not." At least one of the conservative justices, I forget which one, has encouraged people to bring such a case to the Supreme Court so the justice could rule on it. * They use or legally harass people into ceasing publication, including by having the state attack them. Examples include the lawsuit against Media Matters. Even if the defendants win, the financial impact can be enormous. Many can't afford to publish criticism. In the end, everything comes down to politics. Politics makes the law, so it overcomes rule of law. If you don't get involved and make these things change - like our predecessors did to build the freedom the US already enjoys - freedom, including free speech will diminish.
- EricE 2y agoIt had his home address, phone numbers and social security numbers. A reasonable person would just redact those before publishing and then it wouldn't have been an issue.
- mmooss 2y agoThere could be a bit of validity to the complaint, but don't imagine for a moment that it's not being used to pursue the larger issue.
- tacitusarc 2y agoDo you have evidence of this? Because otherwise it seems pretty reasonable to ban someone for posting that kind of information. If someone posted the same data on Kamala or Tim I’d expect to see them banned.
- tetrisgm 2y agoDid it feel like free speech when you got banned?