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
Posted: November 14, 2020 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Some of the more surprising results from Election Season are Biden’s victories in Georgia (the first time in 28 years Georgia has voted for the Democrat) and Arizona, which, aside from 2020, has voted for the Democrat once in 72 years.
Texas was a lot closer than in recent years: in 2000, Bush beat Gore by 21 points. 2004 was worse, Bush over Kerry by 23 points. Even Romney beat Obama by 16 points in 2012. Trump’s 9 point margin of victory in 2016 dwindled to 6 points in 2020. Texas’ downward trend in victory margins surely is furrowing Republican brows in DC.
And Trump’s victory in North Carolina was too close to call until just the other day.
In 2018, 86,164 Californians moved to Texas, the number one destination of Californians leaving the Golden State. 68,516 Californians moved to Arizona, the number 2 destination. Nevada – another narrow Biden victory – was fourth, with 50, 707 Californians moving to the Silver State. And North Carolina and Georgia were 14th and 15th, respectively.
The Republican Sunbelt is under assault. By Californians.
We’re like a virus, and we’re bring our crazy California progressive politics with us.
Law professor and Instapundit Master Glenn Reynolds has urged these states to provide a “welcome wagon” that explains why the generally more conservative politics of these red states have made them so attractive they’ve even pulled Californians away from paradise.
Fine idea, sure, but as the saying goes, one good idea deserves another.
It’s time to Make California Crazy Again.
It’s apparent California must be some kind of conservative hellhole. Why else would all these fine progressive people be leaving the state? We need to make California the progressive paradise, where transgender surgery coupons are handed to you as you cross what racists call a “border,” where snack machines are stocked with your choice of artisanal narcotics, where dollars are delivered to your doorstep so long as everyone takes a number.
We need to draw all those progressive Californians infecting the politics of their newly adopted homes back to paradise. Back to sunshine, cool vibes, and abortion clinics in high schools. Better one state takes the progressive fall than the whole nation.
Wait, progressives already run this state, you say? They have a veto-proof supermajority in both legislative chambers?
What’s that? Their policies are what’s driving everyone out in the first place?
This is what’s called building a chain of evidence.
From what I understand (and @ScottAdamsSays might be interested too) several other people from @chasmartin to @fuzislippers & I suspect many others have been treated the same shabby way concerning the link in question.
but it is dishonest and dishonorable & frankly slanderous to accuse people falsely in writing of "posting or sharing privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their express consent" & locking them when you know it's not true #benfordslaw#MagicBallots
I should point out I’m referring to my 2nd appeal in that tweet
On Friday during my 11 AM Livestream podcast (the Twitter Gulag Archipelago) I will once again try to retweet the original tweet on #BenfordsLaw#electionfraud & #MagicBallots This gives you over 50 hours to fix an issue that should take your least competent coder 60 seconds
repeatedly accusing people of" posting or sharing privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their express consent" IN WRITING when your own support team concedes they haven't just might cross over a legal line I'd defer to @KurtSchlichter or @tedcruz on it
And most importantly other than the 1st one, each of them came after they sent an email acknowledging that they banned me in error
reminder to @Twitter @twittersafety @jack & @twittersupport in 34 hours I will test your system to see if you are still locking people out and falsely accusing them of " posting or sharing privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their express consent"
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)
Well Twitter passed that test
test one I am going to now copy and paste the entire base post onto my site , let the post go up and then retweet my own post and see if twitter locks me.. This will take a few mins… @JulietteAkinyi@SissyWillis
Twitter passed that test then on to test two again which I introduced with a new thread
2/4 in both cases I was locked out my account for 12 hours then given the choice of appealing or deleting the tweet in question in both cases I appealed and won as the accusation they made of me was Patently false (details here)https://t.co/HLFrsoudsX
All of this was captured on my livestream or I should say “would have been since strangly enough the entire broadcast and even the saved file that I recorded offline has vanished and GUESS WHAT HAPPENED?
And it was followed within a few minutes of an email from twitter accusing me of guess what
violating our rules against posting or sharing privately produced/distributed intimate media of someone without their consent
Now this makes the 3rd time they have falsely accused me IN WRITING of this.
I’m not a lawyer and don’t pretend to be one but I’m wondering at what point this becomes actionable?
Anyways that’s where I stand no podcast and no twitter although I might decide to rebroad cast later when I’m unlocked again after I win my next appeal which I’m pretty sure I will.
It’s when I don’t that things might get interesting
And yes I could just let it go or move to another platform but damn it I’m going to make twitter own up and follow it’s own supposed rules and if it means I spend a month making twitter ban and unlock me over and over again so be it.
It’s my way of fighting back and yes it’s a pinprick in the side of an elephant but I’m going to keep it up
I will not submit
Update: Here is the text of my appeal
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.
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)
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.
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)
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)
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)
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
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 