Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump account

Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ... by Chris2048 on Friday April 07, 2017 @10:22AM (#14059844)

> It wasn't just banned out of nowhere

This doesn't have much to do with my point - The final ban was based on LJ.

If you're going to take the "Descartes's Demon" defence, it works both ways:

We don't know if twitter banned Milo for other reasons, but we also don't know if "He was banned because he was harassing people" by the same measure.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ... by odonnellryan on Friday April 07, 2017 @11:56AM (#14060741)

> We don't know if twitter banned Milo for other reasons, but we also don't know if "He was banned because he was harassing people" by the same measure.

This is the exact point I'm trying to make. It doesn't matter why he was banned, Twitter can ban anyone.

As long as they didn't ban him because he was a part of a protected group, it's kosher.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ... by Chris2048 on Friday April 07, 2017 @01:50PM (#14061900)

> This is the exact point I'm trying to make

My original point simply points out Milo was not banned for personally harassing anyone, nothing else.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ... by odonnellryan on Friday April 07, 2017 @03:10PM (#14062645)

Then what are you trying to discuss?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Twitter refuses US order to disclose owner of anti-Trump ... by Chris2048 on Wednesday April 12, 2017 @11:53AM (#14098895)

>> He was banned because he was harassing people

> No he wasn't. Twitter claimed he incited other people to harass LJ.

[ Parent | on HN ]