Comments (128)
sorted by:
Iuviuv 168 points ago +168 / -0

This sounds like exactly what the TOS should have always been for any social media platform.

RobezTobez 70 points ago +70 / -0

Agreed. Its not asking much and basically its common sense. Some hysterical female was probably on the legal teams in the past and made these poor decisions for them.

FORGOTTEN_PEDE 19 points ago +20 / -1

there's no mentioning of wood chippers tho ffs ;D

TGNX 12 points ago +12 / -0

Baby steps.

Iteachfuckingscience 9 points ago +9 / -0

Last week my account was permanently suspended for saying Trump won the 2020 election.

Today I got a notice saying they’ve updated their TOS and my account is back.


HiddenDekuScrub 4 points ago +4 / -0

Wonder how many others were unbanned today. 🤔

SquiggyMcPepe 5 points ago +5 / -0

I've been getting away with what would before have been labeled as violent bloody murder. Replying to tranny faggot tweets with you ain't a woman type stuff and just bold face saying transgenders are a mental illness. Collecting lots of rage tweets in reply and lots of @twittersupport calling for me to be removed but so far I'm free and clear. If you have an old twitter account that got banned appeal it and they will give you some sort of bs reason they did it like so sorry our automated bots made a mistake but here is your account back. I'm still going to make a truth social account once it get to the web browser phase.

TGNX 2 points ago +2 / -0

I tuned out of twitter because it was cancerous and I don't react well to being lied to. Probably not going back.

SquiggyMcPepe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Its entertainment for me. I love finding stupid tweets featured on news reports and popping in to have some quick fun.

TGNX 1 point ago +1 / -0

Different strokes, I guess. I'm just glad someone else has that kind of fortitude. For those of us who lack it.

skyhawk 7 points ago +7 / -0

I believe she was making $15 million a year for it?

Wolfebane84 2 points ago +2 / -0

Women shouldn't be doctors (other than OB/GYN) lawyers, judges, police, firefighters, or in the military in any capacity beyond Nurses and Secretaries.

deleted 29 points ago +29 / -0
FredRedd 12 points ago +12 / -0

Agreed. That is the definition of “A platform.”

peterbeater 5 points ago +5 / -0

Then why the fuck is my account still suspended?

BidenLikesMiners 1 point ago +1 / -0

because you only joined it 99 days ago

FredRedd 1 point ago +1 / -0

I wish I could tell you. I personally never joined Twitter.

HuggableBear 10 points ago +10 / -0

It's literally the reason Section 230 exists in the first place, because it was expected that this would be the policy for all of them.

Mothertrumprr 9 points ago +9 / -0

Before they had the shit written in lawyer talk. It was all loopholes to make the rules fit as needed for their benefit. Now, yeah you're gonna see some shit and learn to seethe and cope.

yuru_yuri_is_okay 4 points ago +4 / -0

But will there be dilation? I will not be satisfied until there's dilation.

aaafirefly123 2 points ago +2 / -0

The only banned content will be stuff which is explicitly illegal.

Some other stuff might get the axe to if it’s disruptive (ie spammers).

JoinTheDiscussion 58 points ago +58 / -0

Its why Section 230 was created!!!.. To absolve service providers of liability from content traversing or stored on web servers.....

AlpineSeaHolly 29 points ago +30 / -1

And that's why the establishment will now attack section 230 because it's in their best interest to make the platform responsible now that they don't control it.

Maga2020Maga2020 7 points ago +7 / -0

It would destroy the internet if they fucked with 230

Redditcanblowme 11 points ago +11 / -0

If 230 were struck down they'd come after this site with an army of lawyers and countless bullshit lawsuits.

permissible_missile 6 points ago +6 / -0

With an army of pedos posting kid pics


aaafirefly123 1 point ago +1 / -0

What would be the angle.

Section 230 required that social media NOT censor anything that wasn’t illegal.

They are more compliant now than they were before.

deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
Pepbrandt 39 points ago +39 / -0

Musk related?

PM_ME_UR_VIVOZ 35 points ago +36 / -1

Writing is on the wall. They're just trying to save their paychecks, at this point.

Daffy 23 points ago +23 / -0

Which means they knew better all along.

marvelwall 3 points ago +3 / -0

both, probably.

EJay_Scott 36 points ago +36 / -0

Does this mean the lying "fact-checks" are done?

GoodJuan 31 points ago +31 / -0

When that foreign commie bitch loses her 17 million dollar salary and gets fired we will know.

usdodsgssog 16 points ago +17 / -1

Gets fired through a wood chipper hopefully

Data 3 points ago +4 / -1

Feet first.

WassermanSchultz 3 points ago +3 / -0

At this point I really don't care as long as she goes through it.

GoodJuan 1 point ago +1 / -0


AdmrlNelson 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think her salary is only (I know) 900k or something. The 17 million number comes from her golden parachute and her stock in Twitter based on the Musk purchase price

GoodJuan 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thanks for the info. She’s living in the poverty level

permissible_missile 1 point ago +1 / -0

900k get you a two bed 1 bath in San Fran if you ship at Aldi

Lincoln_Ford 21 points ago +22 / -1

I still don't agree with removal for harassment. Verbal harassment, especially online, isn't against the law. Unless maybe that includes doxxing. Their communist moderators will still ban you for harassment or hate speech, until Elon fires them.

Lurker6 16 points ago +16 / -0

As long as the term harassment is grounded in the offline, legal meaning of the term, I think it's fine.

If we're at a public place arguing about something with voices raised and mean words being said, that's not harassment. If I follow you home and continue to yell at you, have my friends call you to yell at you, leave you messages over the course of a week, etc. Then that falls under the legal definition of harassment and they would probably need to do something about it.

PraiseBeToScience 5 points ago +6 / -1

Yeah that's what 'online harrassment' should entail... creating new accounts to scream in DMs, using bot spam attacks, following you around to other places and attacking you there, etc. It's all quite immature.

Leftoid 'harassment' is 'voicing an opinion I don't like somewhere I wasn't even originally involved in'.

SpaceForceMilitia 7 points ago +8 / -1

Hahahahahahahaha How The Fuck Is [Online Harassment] Real Hahahaha Nigga Just Walk Away From The Screen Like Nigga Close Your Eyes Haha

HiddenDekuScrub 1 point ago +1 / -0


There can be room for smacktalk without allowing some teenage idiot to send all his friends after you.

Serulin 7 points ago +9 / -2

Depends on harassment level imo. "Fuck you xxxxx", who cares, but if people are creating like 50 accounts and stalking you, I kinda feel there should be something in place.

I had spam callers spoofing numbers so I could not manually block them, downloaded an app to do it instead.

Lincoln_Ford 7 points ago +7 / -0

Yeah, I get that. Hopefully, when Elon cuts down on the bots and spammers, that will fix that issue. I just don't want to get banned for calling some asshole a fag or retard.

WhitePowerRanger 1 point ago +1 / -0

There is something in place. It’s called a block button. If you can type a 240 character tweet, you can hit the block button 50 times. Hell you can also just close the fucking app

MeinDonald 4 points ago +4 / -0

They're just going to hit people with bans for that reason. Literally anything is considered harassment to liberals. Pretty sure this won't change much

lmao 2 points ago +2 / -0

just give ability to block and even ip block

Nibba 1 point ago +1 / -0

I miss being able to shit talk online. Best internet friends I ever met began with shit talking each other

sneak 13 points ago +13 / -0

And just under that:

We reserve the right to remove Content that violates the User Agreement, including for example, copyright or trademark violations or other intellectual property misappropriation, impersonation, unlawful conduct, or harassment. Information regarding specific policies and the process for reporting or appealing violations can be found in our Help Center (https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-report-violation#specific-violations and https://help.twitter.com/en/managing-your-account/suspended-twitter-accounts).

Data 1 point ago +1 / -0

"Harassment" still leaves a lot to interpretation, but we'll have to see how it's applied. We know lefty snowflakes will immediately latch onto that the instant anyone challenges them on the platform.

sneak 1 point ago +1 / -0


Best4Business 9 points ago +9 / -0

Nice... Then they should have no problem unbanning a bunch of folks banned for "offensive language". Like myself. Would love to appeal that ban again, get back on, call everyone a faggot and then leave.

cozy 4 points ago +4 / -0

I want them to unban all the NPC parody accounts. That was legitimately fun.

Chodeus 2 points ago +2 / -0

Probably the best part of the Twitter 2016 election era!

thallos 1 point ago +1 / -0

So long as they have a clear parody flag on them, why not?

PMSocks 8 points ago +8 / -0

If the code base is frozen - how will this policy be implemented?

Does this mean it was:

  • a switch that turns the algo off
  • a fucking Liberal tagging stuff

This will get more interesting - especially if Elon hires a team to investigate who was costing the company revenue by doing more then Section 230 required.

OrangeElvis 8 points ago +8 / -0

Time for some probing and testing, pedes. I would think 2000 Mules and Let's Go Brandon are good starting points.

never42 7 points ago +8 / -1

That's always been in the TOS... at least back to 2017 (earliest archive on archive.today ) https://archive.ph/9HyqY

IllKissYourBoobies 3 points ago +3 / -0

Well, look at that.

28 July 2017 00:38:28 UTC

3. Content on the Services

You are responsible for your use of the Services and for any Content you provide, including compliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations. You should only provide Content that you are comfortable sharing with others. Any use or reliance on any Content or materials posted via the Services or obtained by you through the Services is at your own risk. We do not endorse, support, represent or guarantee the completeness, truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any Content or communications posted via the Services or endorse any opinions expressed via the Services. You understand that by using the Services, you may be exposed to Content that might be offensive, harmful, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate, or in some cases, postings that have been mislabeled or are otherwise deceptive. All Content is the sole responsibility of the person who originated such Content. We may not monitor or control the Content posted via the Services and, we cannot take responsibility for such Content.

Thank you, well informed pede.

South_Florida_Guy 7 points ago +7 / -0

So a PLATFORM and NOT a PUBLISHER, as it should be.

Lol_Garrus 5 points ago +5 / -0

Thats how you become a platform, not a publisher

Lapstrake 5 points ago +5 / -0

Hell yeah!

Thanks, Elon!

Can I actually go to my old twitter account and say what I think now?

Idontevenknow 5 points ago +5 / -0

I'll see how long it takes to actually be implemented, God-speed to you!

NSFW_PORN_ONLY 5 points ago +6 / -1

PLEASE DON'T spread fake news! It's easy to check what was there in older versions and it was exactly the same before. https://twitter.com/en/tos/previous/version_11

VivaElEmperadorDios 4 points ago +4 / -0

So it's okay that I called Nancy P a drunk fucking bitch, right?

TGNX 4 points ago +4 / -0

Italian chef kiss noise

barwhack 3 points ago +3 / -0

Twitter can get stuft forever. Musk or no.

Meddlesom 3 points ago +3 / -0


fdumont 2 points ago +2 / -0

without the manufacturing of consent, it is only a matter of time before the inconsistent ideas break on their own weight. GOOD

PMSocks 2 points ago +2 / -0

I wonder how much following Section 230 will save the share holders?

DonttrustChina 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly what it should be. "For fuck's sake, don't take important life advice from random people on the internet. Don't blame us if you believe bullshit."

Chick-Fil-A 2 points ago +2 / -0

Who is the gigaChad reading Twitter's TOS?

LastPureBlood 1 point ago +1 / -0

I got a notification on Twitter last night of their new tos.

ironhansed 2 points ago +2 / -0

good. stupid soft snowflakes

user365927285937 2 points ago +2 / -0

So can they take off that fucking “covid” tab in the search page?

SeriousTroll 2 points ago +2 / -0

Won't be "back" until most employees have been fired.

BloodDe 2 points ago +2 / -0

Sounds more like real life

denimchicken5 2 points ago +2 / -0

so we can start calling these faggots faggots again? sweet

LastPureBlood 3 points ago +3 / -0

I've been calling blue check marks faggots since I got back on Twitter when Musk was offered a seat on the board. No bans so far.

denimchicken5 2 points ago +2 / -0

"star wars meme" this is where the fun begins.

Fordheartskav 2 points ago +2 / -0

Now watch the dems blame twitter for 2024 when trump wins hahaha! Full circle!!

klowndude 2 points ago +2 / -0

hold gonna go get banned now

deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
JonAz 2 points ago +2 / -0

So lift my ban, Elon. I just got my second ban in a week on the platform lol

TheMAGAlorian787 2 points ago +2 / -0

Do we know how the new TOS differs from the last version?

TheMadManDidItAgain 2 points ago +2 / -0

Proof that legalese doesn't have to be impossible to read or understand. This is a paragraph we can all understand.

MythArcana 2 points ago +2 / -0

And just like that, the Ministry of Truth sent Twitter a memo and everything changed in an instant. Now all of a sudden, there might be "fake news" to be seen, as if we haven't suffered from it for six fucking years straight.

definitelynotaglowee 2 points ago +2 / -0

What's interesting to me also in the news today, the CEO of Twitter has frozen all hiring and there's a mass exodus of senior leaders in the company.

I assume some of those people are trying to get out before they are shackled with non-competes and the current CEO is happy to let them leave without those controls?

Also probably a realization that the financials are a shit-show, probably not all disclosed to investors.

At this point, my belief is the CEO knows his days are numbered and he's literally trying to set the company up for future failure so the cesspool can rise up again elsewhere.

GodKingHarambe 2 points ago +2 / -0

Just checked: I'm still banned

mrsray 3 points ago +3 / -0

me too but submitted an appeal to see what happens ... i only had like 30 followers and only reposted a few posts but was accused of "Violating our rules against platform manipulation and spam."

GodKingHarambe 4 points ago +4 / -0

I've appealed weekly, just to force some Twitter cuck to catch all my redpills.

I was banned for commenting on a NY Post article about an OnlyFans whore.....referring to her as "whoring for cash"

ColbyP 3 points ago +3 / -0

Which is quite literally what she was doing

TrumpingTheStorm 2 points ago +2 / -0

The way I read this is we can now send pictures of unborn babies to pro abortion nut jobs

DickTick 2 points ago +2 / -0


magaberries 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm seeing a possible lawsuit though because the TOS BEFORE did not warn people that they would, for example, have their campaign accounts pulled from the platform because they didn't conform with the Democrat agenda.

This would seem to be an "in kind" contribution to the person's opponent when you take down someone's campaign page. They never warned people about that!

They also never warned people that they would shadow ban them, causing them to lose business, taking down their business page, etc.

LOTS OF THINGS they NEVER warned about BEFORE. So, if they're WARNING NOW, well, I think it shows how incredibly negligent they were BEFORE.


TheOutlawPepeWales 1 point ago +1 / -0

TLDR; "cope and seethe"

ClownWorldNow 1 point ago +1 / -0

virtue signaling...who gives a rats ass......those of us that were still are shadow banned

cook_does 1 point ago +1 / -0


Formerlurker92 1 point ago +1 / -0

The salty tears are delightful

thallos 1 point ago +1 / -0

How hard was that to write? Seriously.

deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
Bonami 1 point ago +1 / -0

Means nothing, just checked and all the sites that were carrying info on Ukraine that I had been following are still blocked.

556y308 1 point ago +1 / -0

“All content is the sole responsibility of the person who originated such content”

Am I interpreting it wrong when I think that this will be used to curb free speech? Or hold people accountable?

556y308 2 points ago +2 / -0

I have a feeling this will play into section 230 “reform” in some way

Jaqen 1 point ago +1 / -0

My pede, you did it! This is actually newsworthy. This is the only thing that matters when it comes to these services. The ToS!

And this is a major change in stance. This is actual departure from previous positions on content ownership, very impressive!

I’d like to see what other changes took place, interesting stuff!

BeanieRed 1 point ago +1 / -0

In other words, act like an adult.

probablyacoincidence 1 point ago +1 / -0

Shame this even has to be said. Kind of existed before anyone said anything.