Two Months Later, and I Still Don't Know Why Twitter Suspended My Account for Good

but I will keep appealing until I get a human answer

**PLEASE SHARE THIS POST WIDELY on Twitter and other media to expose the unfairness and arbitrariness of Twitter’s account suspension and appeals process. Exposing Twitter’s misbehaviour will help me and others who have been unfairly targeted by Twitter, to get our accounts reinstated. You may include the hashtag, #ReinstateDavidThunder**

---

In this post, I offer an update on my latest efforts to appeal Twitter’s decision to permanently suspend my Twitter account (@davidjthunder). By the time you get to the end of this post, I think you will agree that Twitter’s disciplinary procedures and appeals process (at least if this case is at all representative) is anything but transparent and accountable. Twitter presses a button, and any account can be wiped out for good, on vague grounds of sharing “false or misleading information” that Twitter does not even need to spell out.

That makes everyone on Twitter - at least anyone who wanders outside Twitter’s ideological and political comfort zone - fair game for Twitter’s thought police. Twitter can wave its wand and silence voices at will, with no due process. If Twitter was a small-time company, with lots of viable competitors, that would be no big deal. But it is a very big deal, in a world in which Twitter is an unrivalled platform for public commentary and debate.

And if you are targeted, as I have been, there is very little you can do to defend yourself, since the precise grounds of your charges are never actually spelt out, and Twitter’s engagement with the appeals process is perfunctory, reactionary and unreflective. For example, each of my appeals have been dismissed without any serious engagement, just an uninformative gesture toward “repeat violations” of Twitter rules.

Now, fasten your seatbelts, for a bumpy ride through Big Tech censorship…

On October 13th 2021, Twitter suspended my account (@davidjthunder), thereby depriving my 25,000 Twitter followers of access to well over a year of commentary and videos, and depriving me of the continued use of my account to share opinion and commentary on its platform. The account suspension was sparked by a tweet of mine that alluded to the use of Ivermectin to treat Covid in Mexico and India. Twitter accused me of “sharing false or misleading information about Covid-19 which may lead to harm.”

When I appealed their decision, requesting clarification of the grounds for suspension, they just sent a fairly standardised letter, within 11 hours, saying that my account had been permanently suspended for “repeat violations” of Twitter rules. There was no evidence in their reply that they had undertaken any serious review of their decision, or intended to clarify to me how exactly I had violated their rules:

It is noteworthy that Twitter at no time, either in their accusation or in their reply to my appeal, actually specified which statements of mine had violated their rules, or how these statements constituted misinformation. Several of my tweets had been flagged by them over the year, but since several of my tweets contained multiple assertions, to this day I still don’t know which of my assertions were viewed as “false or misleading” by Twitter, or counted toward the “repeat violations” they alluded to.

So Twitter is violating the first basic rule of a just and transparent trial or disciplinary procedure, namely, that the accused must be informed of the precise behaviour or speech that has been identified as wrongful or non-compliant. Once that basic rule is flouted, transparency goes out the window, and the whole procedure, including both the suspension and the appeals process, is vitiated at its roots.

In recent weeks, Twitter has thankfully reinstated the accounts of a number of commentators who had faced permanent suspensions, including Abir Ballan (@abirballan) and Mark Changizi (@markchangizi), on issues related to the pandemic. Heartened by these stories, I decided to make a fresh attempt to appeal my suspension.

So on Tuesday, December 28th, I submitted a fresh appeal, in the hopes that finally, a human being might give it a fair review, rather than dismissing it with a pro forma, mechanistic reply. Here is the full text of my appeal:

My account @davidjthunder was suspended on 13th October 2021 on grounds of sharing "false or misleading information about Covid-19 which may lead to harm." I appealed the suspension and was told my account had been "permanently suspended" due to "repeat violations of Twitter rules."

I am a respected scholar with several books and many peer-reviewed articles published in my field. I offer a moderate and evidence-based critique of Covid policies, based on peer-reviewed scientific evidence and clinical testimonies. Twitter has never specified which "repeat violations" of their rules justified a permanent suspension. I would like to see the evidential basis for your conclusion that I have shared "misinformation" about Covid-19.

Many scientific and political claims made on Twitter and in scientific journals are false, by definition, since people defend both sides of the question and both sides cannot be right. That is how scientific and moral inquiry must proceed. Being mistaken is not the same as sharing "misinformation." 

The final tweet that sparked my suspension asserted that Ivermectin is being used in different parts of the world, including Mexico and India, to "cure or alleviate Covid-19." It is part of the official treatment programmes of governments in India and has been shown to reduce mortality levels in controlled trials in Mexico. The intention of official agencies using Ivermectin was clearly to "cure or alleviate Covid-19," so how is my claim above "false or misleading"?

I also claimed that Ivermectin had a better safety profile than the Covid-19 vaccines. That does not mean I am saying we should not use the vaccines. It just means that Ivermectin is a relatively safe drug. The number of reported deaths associated with Ivermectin after over 20 years of widespread use as a WHO-supported "essential medicine" is extremely low and far, far lower proportionately than the number of deaths associated with Covid-19 vaccines. So my claim that it has a better safety profile is scientifically incontestable, and cannot be deemed either false or misleading.

As a long-time user of your services, I believe I deserve, as a matter of basic justice, to be told which specific claims I made constitute "repeat violations" of Twitter's rules, and why. So far, nobody in Twitter has actually provided me with any evidence showing that I violated Twitter rules "repeatedly." 

To reiterate, many aspects of science and politics are disputed daily among scientists. The fact that a claim is controversial or disputed is not sufficient to show that it constitutes "misinformation." All of the claims I have made are reasonable extrapolations from published data in the public domain. As such, they cannot be reasonably construed as "misinformation," unless misinformation is any claim that Twitter happens to dislike or disagree with. 

I sincerely hope that my case will be fairly reviewed on its merits. In making this appeal, I am placing my trust in the integrity and fairness of your review process. 

Thank you for giving a careful and fair consideration to my appeal. 

Yours sincerely,

David Thunder

Twitter wasted no time in digging into my case and reviewing all the relevant facts. They were so diligent, in fact, that they got back to me within 19 hours, to report their findings:

This is exactly the same pithy reply, word for word, that I received to my first appeal. In each of my appeals, Twitter expedited their reply within 24 hours. And in each case, Twitter used a mechanistic formula that fails to specify the precise assertions that have allegedly flouted their rules “repeatedly,” and no indication of the information in those assertions that is deemed “false or misleading.” In short, all Twitter did was to hit a button and trigger a standardized rejection letter. Zero engagement with any of the substance of my appeal. If a judge acted like this, he would soon lose all credibility, and most of his judgments would be quickly reversed in a higher court.

Not easily discouraged, I decided to file a new appeal, making more explicit the fact that Twitter has never connected my suspension to specific assertions that I have made on their platform or shown me evidence that any of those assertions was “false or misleading” in the relevant sense. Here is the text of my renewed appeal, dated 29th December 2021:

Dear Person in Twitter Support,

Please explain to me my “repeat violations” of your rules and the evidential basis for them.

Otherwise you are not treating me fairly and equitably. I deserve to understand the specific grounds for my permanent suspension from your platform.

Sending out a stock email saying “because of repeat violations” does not constitute a reasonable explanation of the SPECIFIC grounds for my suspension, nor does it indicate WHICH of my assertions violated your rules, since I have made multiple assertions in each tweet.

Nor does it explain what was “false or misleading” about claims attested by public reports and studies, such as the claim that Ivermectin IS WIDELY USED in different parts of the world, like Mexico and India, with the intention of curing or at least alleviating Covid-19.

In denying this claim, you yourselves are propagating misinformation.

So far, I see no evidence that a human being has carefully engaged with my appeals. I get the same generic, stock response to every appeal. This latest response arrived in 19 hours! Did you actually review my case carefully?

Can you please do me the courtesy, and justice, of reviewing my case CAREFULLY and explaining your reasons for rejecting the careful arguments I have presented for restoring my account?

This is an excellent opportunity for Twitter to correct an overly hasty decision that has no basis in the actual assertions I made.

These generic, machine-like responses you have given to my appeals give the distinct impression that there is little attention to detail and little interest in reviewing the basis for your decision.

Twitter is acquiring a reputation for carelessness and arbitrariness in its appeal procedures, because the specific reasons for violations, and the specific assertions that are charged with breaking Twitter rules, are never actually spelt out.

Gesturing toward a rule against sharing “false or misleading information” without ever explaining WHICH assertion was false or misleading, and why, is an opaque accusation impossible to respond to on its merits. Essentially, your allegations and appeal procedures, at least as I have experienced them, are hopelessly vague and opaque to rationality, along the lines of a mock trial.

I have responded in good faith and pointed out the publicly known evidence supporting my assertions. You have responded by vaguely gesturing toward “repeat violations.”

Where is the humanity, prudence, fairness, and rationality in Twitter’s appeals procedure?

You still have a chance to surprise me by finding a human being to review my case carefully and reverse your groundless decision to permanently suspend my account. At the very least, I beseech you to explain to me which of my assertions constitute “repeat violations” of your rules, and why.

Yours sincerely,

David Thunder

Twitter’s reply to my renewed appeal arrived within 9 hours. True to form, they ignored the substance of my appeal, replying with a pro forma, mechanistic, de-personalised letter repeating word for word the same vacuous phrases of their first two replies, to the effect that I was guilt of “repeat violations,” none of which they have ever actually spelt out for me. This is not the handiwork of a thinking, breathing, reflecting, engaging, human being. It is the handiwork of a shoddy, cut-and-paste machine-generated refusal to engage.

I feel I’ve done all I can to engage Twitter’s appeals process in a rational and evidence-based manner, but so far, I have have been confronted with generic, pro forma replies that do not even begin to engage with the substance of my appeals. The accusations themselves - “repeat violations” - have not even been spelt out. For a company with such an enormous power over our public sphere, this level of opacity and unaccountability is hardly acceptable.

Will a human being in Twitter ever actually sift through my Tweets, identify which affirmations fell foul of their rules, and reconsider their decision with an open mind? It’s not impossible. But I’m certainly not holding my breath! As far as they are concerned, this case is now “closed.”

---

**PLEASE SHARE THIS POST WIDELY on Twitter and other media to expose the unfairness and arbitrariness of Twitter’s account suspension and appeals process. Exposing Twitter’s misbehaviour will help me and others who have been unfairly targeted by Twitter, to get our accounts reinstated. You may include the hashtag, #ReinstateDavidThunder**