zlacker

>>prawn+(OP)
It's interesting that many are debating the value of this 'rule', when this action is blatant abuse of his powers to silence his critics. He has now a lengthy and growing history of this type of behavior, so it was 100% foreseeable. He could just come out and say that its his twitter and he can do what he wants, but no, because he also wants to be seen as a 'defender of free speech'. He acts like a-hole, but then expects unquestioning adoration.

>>Eddy_V+Xv1
Most of HN completely miss the intent of conventional doxxing rules and widely accepted privacy laws in most countries.

- Public figures, like politicians, top businessmen, and so on don't get the same amount of privacy and protection as regular Joe. You can follow them and track them. If you have power and influence, you don't enjoy the same privacy protections as others. That's a really good principle to have.

- Elon Musk himself is know for punching down that violates this principle. His M.O is to point his crazy followers against regular Joes and then playing innocent. "It was not me".

>>nabla9+yA1
It's funny how this debate has shifted. Now that Elon owns twitter, it's Elon haters bringing up the law whereas before they were talking about how twitter can do what they want as a private company.

For my money, there's absolutely nothing wrong with twitter disallowing "person trackers". Legality aside, whether it's Elon Musk or Nancy Pelosi, the subtext of these trackers is creepy and threatening and banning them from some platform is fine.

>>slibhb+EC1
Exactly, the hypocrisy knows no bounds.

They were defending Twitter's biased nontransparent censorship before only because it aligned with their bias. Now that it doesn't match their bias, they see the problem.

Finally, welcome to the club!