Comment on X.com blocks access to Ekrem Imamoglu, leader of Turkish opposition
biofaust@lemmy.world 1 day agoI know they would comply just as well, as I stated in another comment, because they are a private platform, but actually in this case the presence on Bluesky of the Imamoglu account in perfect condition with 129K followers proves that something else must be the case here.
Also, X didn’t give a shit about complying in Brazil.
Nah, Nazi platform does nazi stuff, it’s that simple.
You can come down the mirror now.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 22 hours ago
Bluesky blocked his account in turkey btw, just like X did. Bluesky have made no mention of challenging the legal request in court like X have though.
Iirc the Brazil situation was the first time anything like this had happened since Musk bought Twitter. They definitely didn’t handle it correctly, but they’ve clearly learned since then. Now they comply with legal requests and challenge them through the courts. Would you prefer they just folded every time and didn’t challenge, like all the others? Like Bluesky?
biofaust@lemmy.world 21 hours ago
The fact that Bluesky didn’t post about it doesn’t mean they did not challenge.
Also, a file on Google Drive is not a petition submitted. There is nowhere a letter signed or stamped as received.
You know you can pay a law firm for drafting a letter and then not send it, right?
There are too many conclusions you are coming to without knowing the actual facts.
I judge what happened for sure.
And for sure both of them complied, officially asked to or not, to obscuring a political prisoner’s account (and dozens of other activists as well, by the way).
Also, regarding X, this is old news, from the end of March.
Also, are you X? Like, the platform, its personification? Because if you are not, then I didn’t call you a nazi. You can go clean your snot from your neckbeard.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 10 hours ago
So your position is that X aren’t challenging the censorship request in court?
That’s one hill to die on I guess.