[mewpmewp2]

His position was about moderating legal content. He thinks moderating legal content is censorship. He is in favor of taking down illegal content. If people think currently legal content should be taken down they should appeal to change the laws and it shouldn't be part of at least their platform to judge the legal content. That's his position, not my position.

[jcranmer]

That's what he says his position is. He bans people who post the movements of his private jet. He also has had Twitter file lawsuits against people merely for saying mean things about Twitter.

Of course, it's also possible that he's a complete idiot and has no idea what the First Amendment actually permits in speech, like he stopped paying attention after Schenck v US.

[ohnoitsahuman]

Just because he's a hypocrite, doesn't mean we should censor more.

[mewpmewp2]

Yeah, that is hypocritical. He should be congruent in his views and in any ambiguity in content disfavoring him he should lean towards giving benefit of the doubt to prove lack of bias. Although in this case there didn't seem to be any ambiguity, he should have not banned the account.

[leereeves]

Filing lawsuits is entirely consistent with a position that the courts, not private companies, should regulate speech online.

Then there's Jack Sweeney, the guy tracking Elon and his private jet - who, by the way, was accused of facilitating stalking by Taylor Swift. For him, X made a policy against any account "doxxing real-time location info of anyone".

Does anyone here actually want to argue that tracking real-time location info should be allowed?

[bostik]

I'll bite.

Real-time tracking of a person or their ground transport: not ok.

Real-time tracking of a person's plane: ok.

And the reason for such a distinction is that planes can only land on specific ground slots. That also means that real-time tracking of a person's helicopter falls under "not ok". And by extension, the same will hold for flying taxis, once they take off[tm].

We don't (yet?) live in a world where shoulder mounted surface-to-air missiles, outside of war zones, are a realistic threat.

[leereeves]

Once a stalker knows a specific place and time to find their victim, they can simply follow them until they have an opportunity to do worse.

"Missiles" are just a straw man.

Hopefully Taylor Swift will follow through, Sweeney will be sued or even prosecuted for stalking, and we'll find out if this really is legal.

[longdustytrail]

He just banned posting the identity of pseudonymous accounts which is definitely not illegal. He also banned posting public information about the movements of his private jet which is also definitely not illegal.

This stuff would easier to take seriously he was consistent about it. At this point it’s kind of insulting