Twitter really really doesn’t want anyone to read this article, “Joe Biden’s votes violate Benford’s Law (Mathematics).”  In fact, if you tweet it, you will be locked out of your account, not-so-subtly accused of being some kind of pervert, required to remove it, and have a Twitter message slapped on your page for 14 days as shaming ‘punishment.’

Frankly, the Benford’s Law article is kind of flawed and problematic, but I did find it interesting enough to share and commented that I found it “interesting” in the tweet that Twitter coerced me to remove in order to regain access to my account.

Uploaded by FS_screenshotThis tweet, I was informed via email, violated rules regarding “privately produced/distributed intimate media.”

Uploaded by FS_email screenshot“Intimate media” . . . what?!  Read the article, here’s the archive link if you prefer to use that.  This is a publicly-posted article about a mathematical theory as applied to perceived voter fraud in several states; it is not “privately produced/distributed intimate media,” which frankly sounds to me like porn or something equally skeevy.

Apparently, Twitter thinks this article is “revenge porn” that includes “creepshots” or “non-consensual nudity”?

Further, Twitter claims the article was shared “without [the website’s] express consent.”  If it were a consent issue, I’m pretty sure the writer/site owner would be more than happy to provide consent for their post to be shared not just by me but by anyone and everyone.  Websites rather like to have their content read and shared “without their express consent.”

But of course this is not an “intimate media” problem, nor is it a “consent” problem; it’s an article that seems rather damning to the Biden campaign and to those responsible for what looks like widespread voter and election fraud in numerous states.

Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit warned that those who were retweeting his tweet on a post about the article (I first saw the article at GP via the LI Reading List) were having their accounts locked. I retweeted this warning tweet with no problem; I did not retweet the tweet Jim said was causing account locks.

It was only when I tweeted the original source that my account was locked.

FS screenshotI figured it was the Benford’s Law post until I got that bizarre email about “intimate media” and “express consent,” then I wondered if my Twitter account had been hacked by some mad porn ring.

FS screenshot

But no, it was the Benford’s Law post.

FS screenshotFS screenshotI love the part where Twitter attempts to shame and ‘punish’ me by placing a notice on my account for 14 days.  Here’s my scarlet letter:

Like anyone would (ordinarily) see it, anyway, given Twitter’s propensity to shadowban and to limit distribution on conservative accounts.  In fact, it’s particularly strange that they would lock me out of an account that reaches so few people over an article that is being shared far and wide anyway.

Twitter censorship is very real, and while I didn’t think deleting this innocuous tweet was a hill worth fighting for as the New York Post’s most certainly was, I do think it’s important not only that everyone read the banned article and form your own opinion but that we also call Twitter out for their shady (insulting) practices.

And join Parler.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.