billionaire media tycoon and mayor of san francisco. vp @foundersfund. ringleader @hereticon. editor-in-chief @piratewires 
Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
if someone had millions of followers and was making videos all week about you, ridiculing your sexuality and some of their followers were constantly doxxing you, your address, phone number and personal information, would you be like, “Cool! Free Speech!”
he’s not a marginalized voice. in fact, at the moment, he appears to be one of the most powerful figures in media. and it’s pretty simple: threats of physical violence are illegal. ppl who do those things should be held responsible for them.
But what if it’s not the original broadcaster, but that they’re effectively creating, encouraging and goading an ecosystem of followers who are engaging in those threats?
it could easily be argued you have done that for the harassment of NIMBYs — it wouldn’t be true, imo, but it could be argued. who makes these decisions? and would you be comfortable if it was a NIMBY?
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
