Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ...
by hsod on Thursday April 06, 2017 @06:38PM
(#14055348)
There's a difference between banning an account for TOS violations and complying with a legal order to unmask an anonymous user to a law enforcement agency. Not sure why you would try and conflate them
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ...
by brazzledazzle on Thursday April 06, 2017 @08:02PM
(#14055850)
The conflation between the two is happening throughout the comments for this story. It would take such a complete misunderstanding that I can't help but think these people aren't actually confusing two fundamentally different things and are just biased to the point that they can't think critically and are reaching for anything no matter how ridiculous to paint Twitter in a bad light. But perhaps I'm missing something that's obvious from their perspective.
Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ...
by ursus_bonum on Thursday April 06, 2017 @09:39PM
(#14056359)
This precisely. What is going on in here? This story has nothing to do with Twitter banning certain accounts, so why is half the discussion about that?
Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ...
by mikeyouse on Thursday April 06, 2017 @11:28PM
(#14056872)
Because much of politics is circular and virtue signaling is just as important to the libertarian-leaning HN population as it is to the 'snowflakes' that they loathe.
Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ...
by abraves10001 on Thursday April 06, 2017 @06:47PM
(#14055422)
Shutting down an account != revealing personal information, either.