Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I was banned from Twitter within hours of Elon having control for changing my displayed name (not my handle) to "Elon's Musk" in a reply to something unhinged that he had tweeted.

So much free speech.



Were you banned for your speech or for being a troll intent on being disruptive to the community? Because there's a difference.


Shouldn't matter. Musk is a free speech absolutist after all.


In this case, they are one in the same. And if it is a free speech forum, then it should have been a protected act.

Free speech means free speech for those you dislike too. It also means having a space for those that are disruptive, loud, and engaging in trolling. That's what those fire-and-brimstone "you're going to hell" preachers are doing at universities. (Which isn't all bad - it gives students a great opportunity to learn debate and to stand up for what they believe in.)

The ACLU has represented the Vietnam War protestors, the KKK, neo-Nazis, LGBT activists, Westboro Baptist Church members, religious followers of Jerry Falwell, flag burners, anti-abortion activists, women's rights activists, communist party members, gun rights advocates, anti-Trump protestors, BLM protestors, and more. And it's a good thing they represented every single one, because erosion of free speech for those we don't like will eventually get back to us.


The most ardent tattletales from pre-Musk Twitter, angry that their sandbox has been opened up, have now co-opted the free speech argument to act like complete assholes. They're not one and the same.

To those I suggest they move on to BlueSky, where the preshared blacklists and ability to inform on others they despise would be more to their liking.

Alternatively, they could go touch grass.


The easiest thing for a truly evil person to do is lie. They lie about being good, first and foremost. That most people are just a bunch of willfully ignorant rubes works very well for them, unfortunately.


So you were banned for the new rules on imitation as opposed to free speech


This is clearly not an imitation. Parody if nothing else which is protected by fair use.


The imitation rule states that it's perfectly fine to run parody accounts as long as you clearly state that it's a parody. There are a ton of accounts named Elon Musk Parody, Biden Parody and similar

Without it every post of a famous person was botted with 100 accounts with identical display name, pfp that tried to promote scams like with YouTube comments


Here's an account that calls itself Michelle Obama (not even Michelle's Obama) after the parody rule went into effect (unlike Elon's Musk). It doesn't label itself a parody. It's still there. https://x.com/TaxpayerEnrique


The user says they were banned within hours of Elon taking over Twitter. New Parody rules did not come into affect until November 2022.


I replied to your comment about what constitutes imitation and why that rule exists. Neither of us have any idea about the details of that particular ban


I know why the rule exist. Getting banned for a rule that did not exist at the time is an overreach from a self-proclaimed free speech absolutist.


How is that imitation?


That sounds like satire not imitation to me.


"free speech absolutist"


Free speech is the freedom to communicate ideas and opinions. The above censors none.

This is also why spam is not covered under freedom of speech.


presumably downvoted because a) every time you mention 'free speech' to these techbro nutjobs it's clear they don't have the first idea what it actually means b) insecure snowflakes, every one of them.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: