transcription
"I framed the tweet that got me banned from twitter. 🤠"
the tweet: «Hey @BilldeBlasio, I hope you step on a lego. 🖕»
timestamped with Jan. 16áµ—Ê° 2022 B.E. (before Elmo)
replies:
- "Disrespectful to legos, so I get it"
- "Wow that's hateful stuff"
- "You went too far with that, even freedom has its limits bro"
I don't think that's manipulative. Maybe it should be stated more clearly, but it concisely expresses the idea. If you refuse to play by the rules of the website, you're not welcome on that website. It gives you the option to say "You're right, I violated the rules - let's delete this, bring me into compliance, and I can continue using the site.". The alternatives are that you disagree on the post breaking the rules, or that you disagree with the rules - in those cases, the website chooses the rules and what they mean, and if you refuse to comply with the rules, it doesn't want you.
What I don't know is it Twitter has a way to appeal this instead, for when the website moderation makes a mistake. I'm also not commenting on whether the rules are reasonable or not, but I personally like that you get a way to affirm if you didn't mean to break the rules.