RT @DavidSacks@twitter.com
It’s really wonderful how everyone on Twitter is suddenly coming to the defense of “protected” speech and opposing unfair bans. I mean, mission accomplished! https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1589480866182725635
🐦🔗: https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/status/1589480866182725635
1. I'm going to explain this SLOWLY so that @DavidSacks@twitter.com and the other people running Twitter right now can understand.
The issue is not that @elonmusk@twitter.com is banning people. That's his prerogative.
The issue is that ELON MUSK IS NOT DOING WHAT HE SAID HE WOULD DO
@DavidSacks@twitter.com @elonmusk@twitter.com 2. When @elonmusk@twitter.com first struck a deal to buy Twitter, he said, very explicitly that he would not ban speech that doesn't violate the law.
"I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law... going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people"
@DavidSacks@twitter.com @elonmusk@twitter.com 3. This, BTW, is also the view of @DavidSacks@twitter.com, who is currently helping Musk run Twitter. Sacks said, "My content moderation policy is the First Amendment."
@DavidSacks@twitter.com @elonmusk@twitter.com 4. Then, yesterday, @elonmusk@twitter.com started banning accounts that were parodying him.
@DavidSacks@twitter.com @elonmusk@twitter.com 5. @DavidSacks@twitter.com attempted to justify the suspension by claiming these parody accounts were violating the law and engaging in conduct that is not protected by the First Amendment.
6. Even though @DavidSacks@twitter.com apparently consulted Wikipedia before tweeting, he is wrong.
Parody is explicitly protected speech under the Supreme Court precedent (Hustler v. Falwell).
By banning people for engaging in parody, must is censoring people for legal speech
@juddlegum I don’t quite understand why he is being given so much attention. obviously someone with terrible views and not arguing in good faith. why humor him?
