[thu2111]

It's not exactly the same but this article talks about a gay guy being banned for (supposedly) pointing out that there are very non-binary people in the world, and objecting to the idea that language should be changed to accomodate them:

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/megan-fox/2019/10/19/t...

The article quotes some of his tweets on the topic.

[pjc50]

Are we absolutely sure that's what he was banned for? Twitter makes it very unclear, there isn't a "[user was banned for posting this tweet]" report.

Given their failure to ban glinner for far worse stuff I suspect there's something else going on.

[zlynx]

Now that is something I wish all the social media platforms would enforce on their moderator staff.

Every ban should be accompanied with at least one sentence of explanation, a quote from the relevant law or ToS, and the text or image (with a nice red circle if required) in question. If the content was illegal then a summary instead.

It should be a choice to view it, as public as the posting itself, and subject to comments also.

As best I can tell, Facebook bans are done by monkeys hitting buttons randomly to get through their queue as quickly as possible. I don't think Twitter is much better.

[inglor_cz]

This vague arbitrariness is another problem. "We just dropped a hammer on you, bye."

This drives people to paranoia.