Comment by frollogaston
1 day ago
https://ballotpedia.org/Elected_officials_suspended_or_banne...
The example I remembered was Jim Banks suspended for saying "The title of first female four-star officer gets taken by a man" in reference to a transgender officer.
Thanks for the link. Here's the site's full Jim Banks story; it's not incidental but aggressive intolerance.
On October 23, 2021, Twitter suspended Rep. Jim Banks' (R-Ind.) official account for fourteen days after he made two posts referring to Admiral Rachel Levine, a transgender woman and the United States' first openly transgender four-star officer, as a man. A Twitter spokesman said one of the tweets violated the company's hateful conduct policy, which prohibits "targeted misgendering or deadnaming of transgender individuals."[30] After Banks deleted the tweet, Twitter restored his account on Nov. 5.[31]
Banks tweeted in response from his personal account, saying: "Twitter has suspended my official account for posting a statement of FACT. I won’t back down. I’ll be posting on my personal account for the time being … Big Tech must be held accountable!"[32]
Other stories there show I should add another criteria - safety. Dangerous advice ('eat rat poison') obviously should be removed, but of course there are grey areas of wrong but somewhat dangerous ('drinking a few glasses of wine a day helps arthritis'), of information of unknown accuracy.
The site's full story is missing the actual tweet that got him banned. He said the officer is a man. This is an issue lots of people disagree about, and Twitter wanted to force their narrative. Even if this is treated as a targeted insult, they allowed all kinds of those at the same time.
I'm not seeing the new Twitter/X doing anything like this, but would be happy if someone had an example. Last time I asked, it was just the airplane tracker thing.
> He said the officer is a man. This is an issue lots of people disagree about, and Twitter wanted to force their narrative.
I think that violates the golden rule of tolerance (described in the prior post). If Banks won't tolerate the officer's freedom (in this case, about their own gender) then Banks shouldn't be tolerated.
'Lots of people' isn't a standard. The point of human rights is to protect the minority; the majority is almost always free to do as they want. Conservatives say they are a minority on campus but should be tolerated and made safe, for example, and I agree as long as they follow the golden rule.
> I'm not seeing the new Twitter/X doing anything like this, but would be happy if someone had an example. Last time I asked, it was just the airplane tracker thing.
Others were banned, etc., including journalists, but I don't have much time now ... here's one story:
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/twitter-suspends-j...