I saw dozens replicating it last week and I was able to replicate it myself

Later edit: can confirm, I tried it and I got `Visibility limited: this Post may violate X’s rules against Hateful Conduct.`

This is rather disappointing and it might influence my stance on continuing to pay for Premium.

even got an email saying my tweets visibility was limited for the cis tweet but not the trans one

I don't disagree with this stance... I need some substantial proof that posting your opinion without calling for extreme violence is going to get your suspended.

To my knowledge genocide pretty much requires "extreme violence".

For the record, no, decolonization [1] does not mean Jewish genocide, that's his own fever dream, but he's clearly stated that X's position is it does.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decolonization

At the same time: I don't think it's that straightforward to dismiss concerns about "decolonization", especially not with a simple link to Wikipedia. That decolonization could represent programs known to their authors as means of eradicating Jewish people (and, in particular, the plurality Mizrahim population of Israel) is not a fever dream. That doesn't make it true, but it's not a facially invalid concern.

That advocates of "decolonization" widely responded to the October 7th Hamas Al Aqsa Flood attacks with "decolonization is not a metaphor" does your "fever dream" arguments no favors; those attacks were overtly, expressly genocidal.

Lots of terms have been used as euphemism for lots of things. It makes no sense to declare a word used in many contexts now means only this one thing, because one group of people used it this way. As I said in another thread I'm against allowing people to hide behind euphemism and dog whistles, by all means if someone is talking about decolonization of Israel, take action! But claiming this is the only meaning and a blanket ban is nonsense.

The second, "that decolonization could be genocidal only in fever dreams." is not what I said. I can also think of a few instances of decolonization in history that certainly pushed those boundaries. What I said was that the word decolonization does not inherently mean genocide, much less specifically Jewish genocide, and the belief that it does is a Musk fever dream. I also acknowledge that it would have been clearer if I had clarified that some (Hamas, their supporters) are using it that way and that emotional language, as usual, does little to add to a conversation.

the cis thing is whatever, it should be allowed and it is. but if you use it to harass someone, same as if you used other slurs, it would be taken as harassment. this isn't insane for an online platform.

So does Webster's and Wikipedia.

if only there was a country for them.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/decolonization

It may surprise you to know, there is more to the world than one particular conflict.

Edit: to be clear I take no issue with banning calls for violence and genocide, including instances where they are attempting to be obscured by careful use of language. I take issue with claiming that the word, which has been used for decades, in a wide variety of contexts, suddenly inherently means genocide.

When someone today talks about "decolonization", what are the odds that they're talking about Palestine? What are the odds that they're talking about the Belgian Congo? This is especially true if it shows up on Twitter rather than in an obscure journal about the 20th century history of Africa.

So (many) people are using "decolonization" to mean the destruction of Israel. And then (some, and maybe not the same) people are saying "you can't say decolonization means genocide, because there's all this history of Africa and India and the Caribbean and so on - it doesn't necessarily mean that." OK, fine, but these days, on Twitter, what percentage of it does mean wiping out Israel? 95%? 99%?

So, yes, as a matter of definition, you have a point. In practice, Twitter has a point.

In my particular bubble? Essentially zero. It's pretty much always going to be in the context of a past or present British colony, or a person's mental state aka "decolonize the mind". I readily admit my personal experience may not line up with whatever is trending on Twitter/X. And now we can't discuss those things on Twitter/X apparently. Is Twitter/X such a mess that this kind of limit is for the best? Maybe, I haven't been around in a long time, but it seems pretty damn toxic from the outside, but "freedom of speech" it ain't.