2024-09-01 17:45:38
according to the “Marco Civil da Internet”, Article 19. § 1°: The court order [related to illegal content] must contain, under penalty of nullity, clear and specific identification of the content identified as infringing, which allows the unequivocal location of the material. [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(9-1-41) Author
2024-09-01 18:36:08
NNN. The contents of the order are not being put into question. The post is criticizing Twitter's behavior of posting private info, disregarding any respect and safety for private information of the people in question. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(30-0-4) Author
2024-09-01 21:52:19
The tweet distorts the situation through a form of victim blaming. Musk didn’t "choose" to lose Brazil’s users; X was forced to cease operations due to its refusal to comply with censorship demands. [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(15-1-65) Author
2024-09-02 00:12:37
Sanctions against X for lack of representatives and fines ignore constitutional principles. Blocking platforms violates freedom of expression and the right to due process; action is excessive and harmful. Protection of rights should prevail over administrative issues: [Link][Link][Link][Link] CURRENTLY_RATED_NOT_HELPFUL(1-1-13) Author
2024-09-02 12:24:59
NNN - claiming that Elon did not "choose to lose Brazil" while simultaneously stating that he chose to not comply with Brazilian laws, leading to the loss of Brazilian users, is redundant. When you know the outcome and still do not comply, that is making a choice for the outcome. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(9-0-1) Author