Comment by rayiner
5 years ago
What kind of utterly ridiculous policy is hiding posts for “glorifying violence?” So if I write a post about the Bangladeshi independence war, saying how great it was that we beat those damn Pakistanis, my post would get hidden?
When you threaten to start shooting people you are glorifying violence. I am guessing you didn't even look at the tweets.
So if I say it was great that India came in with guns blazing in 1971, killing thousands of Pakistani soldiers to liberate Bangladesh, that is a view that should be censored?
Why is that ridiculous?
Because violence is one of the fundamental political and sociological forces in the world, and preventing people from talking about it in the abstract--as distinguished from targeted threats of violence to specific people--is completely off the reservation. As a Bangladeshi, I have a country because people like my uncle went to war and killed a bunch of Pakistanis. I bet Polish people are glad that Americans gunned down millions of Germans in the 1940s. Steven Spielberg's "Munich" was an amazing account of Operation Wrath of God--glorifying the assassination of terrorists that killed 11 members of Israel's 1972 Olympic team. Violence is often a proper subject of glorification.
In practice, I strongly suspect the Twitter isn't actually applying the policy as written. Instead, they're applying the policy selectively, based on ideological biases.