You should be explaining this to the poster I responded to, not me. But, generally, no. I don't think it's a big deal that anyone emails twitter and then twitter's moderation team looks at a post to see if it violates the rules.

>If Twitter was doing all of this at the behest of the Biden Campaign, does that not count as some kind of in-kind donation?

If that's the metric when why isn't Fox News and all the right wing media, and online Republican commenters not in-kind donations?

Not sure why you're singling out Fox News and "right wing" media here, but I certainly think it's a problem when major networks coordinate coverage with their preferred candidate. That certainly counts as a "service" to me.

> If Twitter was doing all of this at the behest of the Biden Campaign, does that not count as some kind of in-kind donation?

if this is our metric (and it very well could be) then every industry ever needs to be investigated--i guarantee you religions are massively guilty of this. we don't have to look far at all to see churches loudly preaching for one party right now. i guarantee you we'd find all kinds of instances with politicians from oil rich states. and i guarantee you countless other industries will be as well.

im sure elon himself has direct lines to many politicians. honestly i think this is a path we should explore with all monied/influential folks and politicians. lets mitigate quid pro quo with these people.

I clarified in a subsequent comment that what I'm talking about is explicit coordination. There's a major and consequential difference between a Priest telling his Parishioners during Mass that one candidate is better than another, or a media outlet saying the same thing during their prime time show, and some kind of explicit coordination between the campaign and those entities. The former is just run of the mill 1A protected speech, the latter is much more nebulous.

>i guarantee you we'd find all kinds of instances with politicians from oil rich states.

This is a dangerous subject, but KSA obviously does this all the time and it's not any different than Russian tomfoolery on social media, or what all these people did with Twitter, but we all just sort of let it happen because reasons. It's honestly disgusting.

sure, i’m just pointing that, if our metrics are that whatever-this-is should be considered scandalous and that it should be mitigated, then i can guarantee that we’d find way more of this out there. way more.

and i think we’d all win.

direct lines of communications, closed door meetings, etc… between religious leaders and candidates are widely known and id love for us to scandalize this and insist on some clarity and bring down all involved in anything sketch.

direct lines of communication, meetings etc… between oil execs and politicians is also widely known. i’d love to insist on some clarity and bring down all involved in anything sketch.

same with elon too. since the immediate realm we’re in surrounds twitter execs, i absolutely think we need to know which political influencers, politicians, and aspiring politicians he’s been in touch with and what exactly they’ve been discussing. this is absolutely 100% relevant to this exact tweet thread. twitter execs communicating with politically active people.

i can almost guarantee we will uncover all kinds of shady things happening across the board. we all can win here.

Zero disagreement. Maybe what we should be hoping/praying for is a deluge of leaks and whistle blowing from social media employees, explaining how all of this is Oz behind a curtain and Oz, as it happens, is rather stupid.

Yeah there is a difference, a priest telling his people to vote for one candidate while being a tax free organization is illegal.

Do you agree non consentual intimate images should be taken down?

If so, what Biden's team did is not an issue.