I think it is fine to discriminate against companies (that's what boycotts are) and sports teams (that's what rivals do).

Yea, if anything a bot that just reposts and talks about sports news for a specific team is kinda the perfect test case for something like this. It lets you test "identity" for a bot, but no one's going to be that upset if the Mets Fan Bot isn't sufficiently obsessed. Plus, it'll know all of the history and stats for the team, even if it'll probably be wrong a lot. Not that most human fans aren't wrong a lot about their sports teams' history.

it's fine to discriminate agains actions and behavior or self-proclaimed or observed values.

but it's dumb to discriminate against coincidental attributes.

there are things that bots, by virtue of being bots, cannot be - they cannot be of a particular religion, possess a gender, or have a particular race. They can work for a specific company. They cannot have a personality, but they can exhibit personality traits.

Anything that a bot can do and possess I have no difficulty in its being labelled as doing and possessing those things.

Otherwise I do have problems, although theoretically a bot could exist as a piece of art and in that case we should forgive these lying claims to qualities they cannot possess by the current standards our society holds for artistic practice.