Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did not downvote you, but the official statement claims this was the last straw, and not a response to a single offense: https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1037804427992686593
Thank you for replying instead of downvoting. The problem I have is how subjective all of this is, and while they say they are trying to increase transparency I don't see it. This action suggests they keep tabs on accounts and there's some threshold they can reach over a period of time that will flip a ban on even if the actual action that causes the ban wouldn't be bannable in isolation. I've not seen this policy di…
They have rules. Before they were enforced randomly.
Was that fovoritism? Who was at the button for that particular complaint? Who knows!
It doesn’t really matter what their rules or definitions of the terms they use are. Or how subjective people claim they are.
People will choose to use the service or not based on what they see happening.
But for the past few years, it want a question of what the terms meant exactly. People could say things that were blatant violations under the most charitable readings of the rules and nothing would happen.
Or it would.
Or they would show that someone else said thing X the rules forbid and the complainer would get banned and person who actually said it would be fine.
Now we may get some consistency (I’m not holding my breath though). That can only be a good thing.