: I had a post removed from IG because along with a photo of Kimberly Guilfoyle I asked how she could find a plastic surgeon who could add a Y chromosome while letting her keep both Xs, as well as why she had Howdy Doody's cheekbones implanted.
I also may have mentioned that I couldn't tell if she was racing to become Carrot Top or Madame.
For context, it was part of a running IG and Threads thing of roasting politicians and pundits, Guilfoyle in this case.
I appealed.
Fingers crossed.
: I objected to IG's reason for removing the post. They said I was harassing and threatening "someone" and dehumanizing and shaming them. And they removed the post in less than two minutes, and so this was an AI call, which demonstrates how bullshit IG is about their own CoC and ToS.
They can instantly spot "mean" posts but can't instantly spot obvious porn spambot accounts with the same photos and the same links, and even when reported, they take them down less than half the time.
@thedisasterautist They, and their parent company, really like to take down anything political right now. Marking it as otherwise...
Which is in itself a political act, but they do not understand the irony of their actions.
@sentientdessert: But they don't take down a lot of the political stuff.
@thedisasterautist Aye, I believe that too. I would bet there are bots setup to instantly spam report on posts that are negative against the right, which is why they'll go down faster.
Like it functions on twitter.
@thedisasterautist
IG is a Facebook product, and we know Zuck is a Cuck for MAGA now. Your lesson is learned. You cannot trust "free speech purists" to support actual free speech.
@ArcturusSaDiablo: I already knew the lesson, years ago. It's just this time the AI gave me a reason other than "copyright violation" or "sharing private images", which is their usual go-to in my cases. They say I posted photos from the news agencies or even my own photos.
@thedisasterautist I reposted a cat video and IG took it down as against community standards. Huh?!?
@YogaSteve: Their AI is very strange like that. They took down a lot of photos of my own dog, even from as far back of five years ago. They said they were spam, though they said a few violated copyright from, of all things, NBC/Universal.
Photos. Of my own doggo.
@thedisasterautist @YogaSteve You can probably thank half-baked AI tools for the copyright assessment.
@thedisasterautist @YogaSteve The current rush to AI is reminiscent of the early days of the Internet, when organizations were rushing to connect everything to it, regardless of potential security issues.
@thedisasterautist did you appeal? Did they walk it back at all?
@YogaSteve: I did, and they out them all back up in a few days.
I also sometimes have posted my going on #walkies🐾 , and every so often there's music faintly in the background, usually from someone's radio or a business' Muzak. And IG's removed it for copyright, though they usually put the stuff back up when I told them I wasn't posting the music and that it was in no way the object of the post.
: They allow that stuff, not to mention all the Charlie Kirk, Andy Tate, Nick Fuentes, and other such type of hatespam accounts... oh, and all the psuedoscience and medical quackery accounts, and they do that because they would lost 100s of 1,000s (or more) accounts if they did that, which would look bad to investors.
"It's just business."