[hotpockets]

Wasn't this all about the publishing of Hunter Biden's personal information? A violation of Twitter's privacy policy, that they have always enforced. And yes, they have enforced it against journalists posting newsworthy information deleterious to Trump.

"Twitter also said the Post article contained images that included personal and private information such as email addresses and phone numbers, which is against the social network's rules. "

Weird seeing disinfo get upvoted on Hacker News of all places.

[hotpockets]

https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/15/21516729/facebook-twitte...

"7. Twitter’s decision was, at least, more clearly explained. The site has rules against publishing hacked information, it’s used these rules to ban links before, and copying personal files from a laptop without permission — if that’s indeed how they were obtained — arguably falls under them. Twitter later elaborated on its decision, saying the Post story included “personal and private information — like email addresses and phone numbers — which violate our rules.”

[hotpockets]

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/16/twitter-changes-hacked-mater...

"Twitter said the article was in violation of its hacked material policy. The company clarified that it was banning links to the article because it contained images of hacked material with personal and private information."

[hotpockets]

Haha, immediately downvoted, with no comments provided.

[ethanwillis]

You're downvoted because it wasn't hacked information.

[hotpockets]

My point is that that is not the reason for the account suspension. Twitter's policy is very clear and equally enforced! Here is a short video from a reporter that got a suspension for posting private info in a news article, and had to delete the post before getting unsuspended:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=loylqtvKAbU

It would seem to make this case very clear. Right?

[ethanwillis]

A who with 800 views versus the new york times. It's really not as clear as you want it to be. Now, at the same time I think the NYT should be able to publish this.

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1310336685574680578?lang=...

[hotpockets]

The amount of someone's taxes isn't listed in Twitter's privacy policy. Whereas, phone numbers and email addresses are explicityly listed. The policy also makes clear its most important logic:

"Our primary aim is to protect individuals from coming to physical harm as a result of their information being shared ..."