[zachur]

I actually think this is reasonable. The account was broadcasting his live location at any given point in time and there's a strong argument it presented a legitimate safety risk given so many people's hatred towards him.

It's also hard to say he's banning free speech against himself when it feels like half of twitter is anti-Elon sentiment these days.

[hengistbury]

The account was re-broadcasting publicly available information. Anyone who wanted to harm Musk would easily be able to find this information themselves without the twitter account.

[zachur]

True, but the account significantly lowers the bar to finding that information, making it much more likely someone who wishes to do harm could act on it.

[djur]

Seems to me that a lot of the people Elon has targeted with the so-called "Twitter Files" would say they were making the same type of situational harm-reducing judgment call.

[SketchySeaBeast]

Notably, he hasn't blocked other accounts which do the same thing so it's only as rational as it is self serving.

[jandem]

The point is that Musk has been talking a lot about being a free speech absolutist. He even said this last month:

> My commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane, even though that is a direct personal safety risk

And now he's banning accounts. That doesn't make sense for a free speech absolutist.

[zachur]

Yeah I agree the contradictions aren’t a great look. FWIW I generally think he’s been pretty unhinged lately.

Was mostly just commenting that I think doxxing the live location of a prominent & controversial figure is a reasonable line to draw.

[TobyTheDog123]

I have a feeling your comment is going to get a lot of pushback, but I agree with you.

I'm reminded of the plotline from The Newsroom where Sloan Sabbith roasts the ACNgage developer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F86ojBeLbxQ