Nope. When the Post got banned, they were following a policy, more or less consistently. Now, we don't have a policy. We just have the rather mercurial position of one guy -- a guy who said that this was exactly the opposite of what he was going to do.
It is, of course, his right to. His company, his rules, or lack of rules. And it's everybody else's right to leave.
Interesting alternate(?) universe where by banning professional journalists, Twitter becomes viewed as a place where random people rant and rave to their followers gained via popularity contests.
It’s because these journalists wrote articles that were critical of Musk. Not to mention that the publications where these articles were published have vastly stronger rules about things like doxxing than Twitter ever did (in part because they’re actually regulated).
Didn't Twitter cite the California law against doxxing (verbatim), and then only publications which violated that have been suspended?
Based on that, it would seem removing the doxxed info and not publishing it in the future would be an easy way to get their accounts reinstated. Or they can just keep yelling into the wind on Mastodon.
It's so hard to have sympathy when the irony of the situation is so fucking thick.
It’s not doxxing because aircraft locations are a matter of public record. A newspaper or other publication publishing information that’s already public is not a net new disclosure.
reply