3 Days and Waiting Twitter’s New Tina Brown Strategy

I’ve never liked Twitter even though I’ve used it. I was a late adopter, and with good reason. It’s the crystal meth of social media — addictive and destructive, yet simultaneously unsatisfying. When I’m off it I’m happier than when I’m on it. That it’s also being run by crappy SJW types who break their promises, to users, shareholders, and the government, of free speech is just the final reason. Why should I provide free content to people I don’t like, who hate me? I’m currently working on a book on social media, and I keep coming back to the point that Twitter is far and away the most socially destructive of the various platforms. So I decided to suspend them, as they are suspending others. At least I’m giving my reasons, which is more than they’ve done usually.

Glenn Reynolds

Apparently Twitter has decided that even though their written accusations against me are patently false it’s much too embarrassing to grant my appeals quickly only to have their apologies and claims of “mistakes” be illustrated as false.

In fact given the text of my last appeal...

For what is now the 6th time in under 20 days you have locked me out claiming that I was spreading intimate images when I was in fact each time tweeting out a link to a post on Benford’s statistical law which demonstrates the impossibility of Joe Biden’s magic ballots.

Moreover Every time I have appealed you have upheld said appeal apologized and claimed my lockout was an error. YET EVERY SINGLE TIME AFTER THESE “apologies” I HAVE RETWEETED THE VERY SAME LINK TO THE VERY SAME PIECE AND WAS LOCKED OUT WITH THE VERY SAME FALSE ACCUSATION AGAINST ME.

To say this is despicable and dishonorable is to not only repeat myself from previous appeals but to say something that is so apparent that it almost doesn’t need saying. That you still do this demonstrate why other alternatives like Parler are doing so well.

Bottom line you’re accusation is false and I’m not only not going to delete the tweet but after this appeal is won I will test to see if your upcoming “apology” and assertion of a “mistake” is worth any more than it was the last five times you sent them.

At least my next lockout for that same link will be lucky number 7

emphasis mine

they have clearly concluded that there is no percentage in handling my appeal in a timely manor.

So I am now on day three of my lockout awaiting the results of my appeal and counting. For Twitter it’s the best of possible worlds in the sense that they keep me silent while pretending that they are carefully considering the nuances of my appeal but they keep the Benford’s law post from spreading, at least on their platform, while always dangling the carrot that if I just delete the tweet in question I’ll be welcomed back.

Now if I was 14 or 21 or maybe even in my 30’s that might has some oomph, alas dear twitter I’m nearer to my 70th birthday than I am to my 45th and thus lived many decades without twitter, and while it is a convenience I can continue to function without it.

While the in the short term such a plan will achieve goals in the long term discouraging your product (that’s folks like me) from being on your platform while encouraging them to go to other places such as Gab (Parler wants a cell phone number that I don’t have) might not be appealing to one’s customer base (advertisers) which is likely to have as bad an effect on shareholders as encouraging your voter base to not reproduce with the same predictable results.

The problem exemplified by the case of Lena Dunham is that the “r strategy” (parents having fewer children, with the idea of more “quality” in their offspring) pursued past a certain point, involves an increased risk of eventual reproductive failure. This is what I mean by taking into account secondary and tertiary consequences, thinking forward to the third generation down the line. Suppose this hypothetical:

John and Jane have two children.

If both of their children have two children of their own, John and Jane will have four grandchildren.

If all four grandchildren each have two children, then John and Jane will have eight great-grandchildren.

Now a slightly different hypothetical:

John and Jane have three children.

If each of their children have three children of their own, John and Jane will have nine grandchildren.

If all nine grandchildren each have three children, then John and Jane will have 27 great-grandchildren.

In other words, increasing average family size from 2 to 3 — which is not much, really, in terms of r/K theory — produces a third generation of descendants more than three times larger. This fact is obvious from simple arithmetic, yet its social consequences are profound.

Now if your business model is to attract users so that you can sell exposure to them to advertisers the exile of those who actually reproduce might be a bad idea if you wish to have your company last like a Ford or a McDonalds for generations after you are founded.

But if you are merely using a publicly traded company as a means to an end either social acceptance or to advance a narrative a /la Tina Brown then it all makes perfect sense…to all but the shareholders who were looking for profit rather than status that is.

Those guys are into Parler and Gab

Closing thought, one must also consider that depending on who the shareholders are they might not CARE about profit as long as conservatives are silenced consider:

That’s the real point here. Economics isn’t what’s driving this ideology and status is. Jack and the big investors who back him don’t care about the money, they’re never going to be hurting or needing. It’s all about the stuff money can’t buy and by leaning on conservatives you remain acceptable to the “right” people.

Seriously did you think Tina Brown got all those people to lose all that money over the years because they thought she was brilliant or was putting out to get it? Nobody’s that brilliant and there are plenty of woman who would put out for less. It was all about getting the bona fides and entree to the right parties, and the right people and believe me those “right” people who hate our guts will use that for the fullest effect.

Jack and twitter aren’t going to change because of economic pressure or anything else. He’s virtue signaling and that signal is being seen by the people that he wants to see it.

If the primary goal isn’t profit it’s all good to them.

Twitter Apology 3 or 4 Or ERROR MY ASS! (Will They Lock me out again between 1 & 2 PM EST?)

As you can see from the above image Twitter has once again upheld my appeal and restored my account this time waiting a full day as my last post about the instant automatic apology might have been a tad embarrassing for them. Of course they might not have gotten the Lewis Carroll reference I put in the last post comparing them to Fury in the famous poem which I included in my appeal (image follows)

fyi I only included the text not the image as it would not go in the appeal

But this latest “apology raised some questions which I took the liberty of asking and I include them here

If I were you no matter what odds anyone offers you on twitter letting the tweet go without a lock I wouldn’t take them.

Unexpectedly of course

Even as Jack denies Twitter Censorship to Ted Cruz under oath I’m Locked out a 4th Time over Benford’s Law

I was listening to Rush Limbaugh to Ted Cruz Questioning Jack on Vote Fraud Censorship so I thought it was a good time to give a 4th test to see if twitter is still locking folks who put out that Benfords law tweet

So I tweeted out the following:

So I tried tweeting it out again, guess what happened:

One guess what the email from Twitter accused me of:

Cue my shocked face.

Thanks to the horrible Trump Economy I’m working extra hours 4 pm to 2 AM so my lockout will run out when I get home from work and I will appeal at that time and will expect it to be auto approved like the last one was

Unexpectedly of course

Update: put in my appeal at 2:40 AM when I got home from work, this time the auto win didn’t happen (I quoted Lewis Carroll’s long sad tail to them with them cast as Fury) I’m wondering if they are holding back because I was so public about it particularly during the hearings. We shall see.

The Text of my latest appeal to Twitter for the 3rd lockdown of my account in a week:

Here is the text of the appeal I submitted for this third lockdown in one week for retweeting the link to benford’s law

Not only is this the 3rd time you have falsely & baselessly accused me of tweeting “privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent” when I’ve retweeted this post on Benford’s statistical law but it’s the 2nd time you’ve done so AFTER APOLOGIZING FOR THE 1ST LOCKOUT AND SAYING IT WAS IN ERROR.

Not only are you slandering me in writing I might add but after the last time I won my appeal I tweeted you that I’d be retweeting this in 50 hours and updated you several times that I was going to do so.

Yet you locked me anyways and again made false accusations against me in writing. If the first time was in error what was the second, or the third. I’d call it deliberate malfeasance and that’s the most tame description I can think of

Now if you are so terrified about people seeing statistical evidence that Joe Biden’s “magic ballots” are just that have the courage to state you will not allow such evidence to be shown. Stop falsely accusing me of putting out ” privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent”

It’s just this type of deceitful and dishonorable behavior that makes your brand distrusted by half the population.

I will not delete the tweet in question nor will I submit. The only question is will you actually play by your own rules or is there a different set for those whose politics you don’t like?

You’re CEO has sworn under oath that this is not so, your repeated actions toward me this last week suggest he’s a liar.

I think a better word for that last sentence would have been “confirmed” rather than “suggest” but I guess I’m just too polite a guy

Twitter lock test one reprinting the post

The items below are from the site gnews from this post which I’m copying in it’s entity to see if twitter will ban this post or mark my post once it contains the contents therein

I am not making any claim that his analysts is spot on, I’m just twitter

Joe Biden’s votes violate Benford’s Law (Mathematics)

2020 Presidential ElectionDonald TrumpJoe BidenVoter fraud

Himalaya Australia

Himalaya Australia Nov. 07

Source of image: Twitter

As the vote counting for the 2020 Presidential Election continues, various facts suggest rampant frauds in Joe Biden’s votes. So does mathematics in terms of the votes from precincts.

Benford’s law or the first-digit law, is used to check if a set of numbers are naturally occurring or manually fabricated. It has been applied to detect the voting frauds in Iranian 2009 election and various other applications including forensic investigations.

This is what described by Wikipedia:

“Benford’s law, or the first-digit law, is an observation about the frequency distribution of leading digits in many real-life sets of numerical data. The law states that in many naturally occurring collections of numbers, the leading digit is likely to be small.

For example, in sets that obey the law, the number 1 appears as the leading significant digit about 30% of the time, while 9 appears as the leading significant digit less than 5% of the time. If the digits were distributed uniformly, they would each occur about 11.1% of the time. Benford’s law also makes predictions about the distribution of second digits, third digits, digit combinations, and so on.”

One of the examples is the population of the world, which are naturally occurring numbers.

Distribution of first-digit (in %) of population numbers in 237 countries in 2010.
Source: wikipedia.org

A number of people on the internet have checked the votes (precinct by precinct) of Joe Biden, Donald Trump as well as other candidates for their legitimacy in terms of the Benford’s Law.

According a Reddit user, r/dataisbeautiful’s calculation, the ‘normal’ distribution of first digits for the different candidates based on Benford’s law is illustrated below.

Source of image: https://bit.ly/3l7mUE5

Youtuber Nyar has shared the observations on a number of counties, concluding that Trump and others’ votes have natural distribution but not for Joe Biden’s.

In Fulton County, Georgia, which overlaps with the Atlantic metropolitan where Joe Biden is expected to win, all of the three candidates have normal distributions for their votes. (Joe Biden 72.6%, Donald Trump 26.2%, Jo Jorgensen 1.2%. Source: .theguardian.com)

Image from github.com/ (https://bit.ly/2GGTXjq)

In Miami-Dade County of Florida, which includes the Miami metropolitan where Joe Biden is expected to win, all candidates’ votes obey Benford’s Law. (Joe Biden 53.4%, Donald Trump 46.1%, Jo Jorgensen 0.3%. Source: theguardian.com)

Image from github.com/ (https://bit.ly/2GGTXjq)

However, in the Milwaukee County of Wisconsin, which is in one of the key swing states, Joe Biden’s votes violate Benford’s Law while other candidates’ don’t. (Joe Biden 69.4%, Donald Trump 29.4%, Jo Jorgensen 0.9%. Source: theguardian.com)

Image from github.com/ (https://bit.ly/2GGTXjq)

And in Chicago of Illinois, Joe Biden’s votes are abnormal.

Image from github.com/ (https://bit.ly/2GGTXjq)

So does that of Allegheny of Pennsylvania which includes Pittsburg. (Joe Biden 59.0%, Donald Trump 39.9%, Jo Jorgensen 1.2%. Source: theguardian.com)

It looks like maybe Biden had lost big cities like Chicago and Pittsburgh, which is why the fraudulent votes need to be brought in, which skew his curve away from a normal looking one.

For those who are interested to reproduce the analysis, you can follow the instructions here and give it a go.

Author: River|Himalaya Scholars


Now let’s see if twitter tags MY post and starts locking people accusing them of distributing :

privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent

I’m doing this live during the podcast (that youtube has suddenly cut me off of unexpectedly of course)

Here goes

Update: Well they didn’t lock me for putting up this exact reprint post but they locked me as soon as I attempted to retweet the original

unexpectedly of course

DaTechGuy off DaRadio Livestream Podcast 11 AM EST: Banned by Twitter Live Edition?

Today in yet another strong Trump economy edition DaTechGuy off DaRadio comes to you at 11 AM EST where we will talk a bit about

  1. The two courts for POTUS’ must fight in
  2. Democrats in full denial mode
  3. Twitter censorship running a couple of tests on the subject)

It all begins at 11 AM EST (programming note DaPodcast will move to 11 AM EST for the rest of the year due as overtime will be the rule at work till Christmas)

You can watch live here (last weeks podcast is a placeholder)

I promise no singing this week

See you soon

FYI if you like what you see please consider hitting DaTipJar as that’s what this podcast is for

Update: As expected twitter immediately locked me out again as soon as I tweeted out the gnews post, what wasn’t expected was my Youtube connection dropping five minutes into the podcast so twitter couldn’t be seen doing so live.

I’m sure that was just a coincidence

Update 2: It gets better suddenly the rest of the podcast that I recorded doesn’t seem to exist anymore when I tried to save it.

I might rebroadcast later tonight

unbelievable

Another Visit to the Twitter Gulag Archipelago

Senator: Fletcher, there’s an old saying: To the victors belong the spoils.

Fletcher: There’s another old saying, Senator: Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining.

The Outlaw Josey Wales 1976

As you might have heard I won my appeal and was allowed back onto twitter yesterday. They stated my account had been locked in error.

Nice to know that it turned out I didn’t post or share:

“privately produced/distrubted intimate media of someone without their consent”

The first thing I did was tweet out my post titled:

Twitter / Left Censorship A Sure Sign You’re Hitting the Target

The 2nd thing I did was send out some DM to the people I bet with on the election and to Fault Lines Radio (who usually contacts me via twitter to invite me on_ to warn them that I might end up being blocked again:

Here is the DM I sent to fault lines radio show:

Quick FYI just got out of the twitter gulag for posting a link to #benfordslaw piece that they claimed was porn posted without the consent of the person involved. after the lockout I refused to delete the tweet and appeals, won the appeal and checking if the lockout is still automatic for it. If I am locked out or suspended best way to get me is a comment on my site datechguyblog.com use the term ” (not showing this for obvious reasons)” & I’ll know it’s you guys. wish me luck

And then I sent out the following tweets:

Now I should point out something here that I didn’t realize until a few minutes ago. When I look at test 1 while logged onto my own account I can see my tweet.

BUT when I look at test one when not logged in (which is how I’m accessing these tweets now what shows up in place of the tweet is “This tweet is unavailable”.

Oddly if I click on that “unavailable tweet” in that different browser the tweet shows up and I can access the piece

But I digress…

So after test one it was time for test 2

so I did

Everything was seemingly working and I was literally in the process of typing out that twitter had passed test two when suddenly….

Mind you this was less that one hour after I my account was unlocked and I had been informed by twitter that I had been locked out in error.

As normal there was an email notice from Twitter. One guess what the email said I had done…

…if your guess was they said I had distributed:

privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent

Then you are correct.

So in summery for the 2nd time in under two days twitter has not only locked my account but slandered me by claiming I’m pushing out Porn.

I’m again appealing this lockout. Here is what I wrote them this time

Not only have you once again slandered me with a palatable lie claiming that I shared “privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent” but you did so less than one hour after you UNLOCKED said account acknowledging that this same accusation over tweeting out the same link which goes to a piece on Benford’s mathematical law was false and stated I was locked out in error and apologized for doing so.

Furthermore you did so after I tweeted twitter safety saying I was about to retweet the tweet that you apologized for locking me out over to confirm that things were restored. That doesn’t cover you guys with glory.

If you are so afraid of people seeing circumstantial evidence of Joe Biden’s election 2020 magic ballots have the strength of character to admit that’s why you’re locking my account rather than making base and slanderous accusations against me distributing porn.

Last time it took about a day. Let’s see how long it takes this time for them to admit they are wrong.

I further intended to keep performing this test when reinstated and going through this process until twitter removes the lock on that piece or bans me.

I suspect that will be sometime after the court cases on election 2020 are resolved…unexpectedly of course.

Closing thought. If they are persisting in this kind of thing, that suggests they know they are not secure in their position and are doing all they can from keeping regular people from seeing rational arguments demonstrating the existence of Joe Biden’s Magic Ballots