Changing its policy, X bans posting the real names of people behind anonymous accounts, after suspending accounts that unmasked a suspected neo-Nazi cartoonist
https://www.nbcnews.com/... Steve Thompson / @SteveThompson@mastodon.social : “Elon Musk's X Is Suspending Accounts That Reveal a Neo-Nazi Cartoonist's Alleged Identity” — https://www.wired.com/... “Researchers and journalists have been blocked on X from sharing the alleged identity of the neo-Nazi cartoonist Stonetoss.” — #Musk #Twitter #neonazis #cartoons #Stonetoss Bluesky: @apocalypticanow.bsky.social : A policy that will be applied consistently and impartially, I'm sure [embedded post] X: @safety : X's Rules strictly prohibit the publication or posting of other people's private information without their express authorization and permission. This includes contexts suggesting abusive intent, harassment or incitement to harass, as well as the distribution of media that may... @leftcoastist : @MSymchuk ... elon changed X policy on deadnames & pronouns when right wingers like Ben Shapiro threatened to pull ads. elon also allowed the doxing of trans people by right wingers. I find it incredibly hypocritical to change policy again to protect accounts only when it is a right winger. David Gilbert / @daithaigilbert : After the publication of our investigation into Elon Musk blocking researchers for outing neo-Nazi cartoonist Stonetoss, X has updated its privacy policies to specifically prohibit people sharing “the identity of an anonymous user” https://www.wired.com/... Tom Coates / @tomcoates : @Safety Oh for Christ's sake! The amount of content on here designed to harass is off the charts! There are accounts called “n*****” that spew abuse and you do nothing! Don't try and peddle us this crap. No one believes it! Michael Symchuk / @msymchuk : @daithaigilbert @GwarWorin I would argue there are just as many people using legitimate anonymous accounts to prevent persecution in counties like Iran or Russia and if you can out problematic accounts you can also out people to which outing could be fatal. @romanvalentinus : @Safety This is never consistently enforced, opening the platform to liability. How about imposing it equally? LibsofTiktok should be your first ban example for all their violation of this policy. @acabylonbee : you can tell this is a carefully thought out and executed change in policy because they literally left in the part later in the same document that says they don't consider sharing names to be a violation https://help.twitter.com/... [image] Anthony Ward / @shnozzmoana : @Safety Does it prohibit posting false personal information about someone's daughter? In which case please protect @jk_rowling who was under constant attack yesterday and will have to engage her lawyers again. I know lawyers have to eat, but please don't feed the trolls @safety. @raderje : @Safety ** Unless you get on Elon's good side and he decides to let everything slide. Ronald John / @rontech777 : @Safety Can you please clarify the sentencing of those offenses 😂 Steven Monacelli / @stevanzetti : Elon Musk literally changed the terms of service because a neo-Nazi cartoonist with hundreds of thousands of followers was identified as Hans Kristian Graebener. Ari Drennen / @aridrennen : @Safety why didn't I even receive a case number when I reported Libs of TikTok for publishing old photos of me multiple times? Is that account immune to user reports? Alex Goldman / @agoldmund : That is the most insane privacy rule I have ever read. Also just fyi [image] @ttecclesbrown : @Safety It's awfully hypocritical to post this (which I agree with fully, of course) while at the same time letting serial doxxers like @esqueer_ get reinstated with barely a slap on the wrist. @esqueer_ knowingly and willfully flaunted X's rules and appears to be getting away with it... @eyesontheright : Libs of TikTok gonna get banned I assume Leigh Drogen / @ldrogen : “Free speech absolutism”, unless the owners don't like it Tom Odell / @tomodell : @Safety And yet when a far-Left liberal threatened my life and posted that he was going “to hide in my backyard until I came out of my house and then kill me when (I) came out of my house,” @ElonMusk's “Safety” group did absolutely not one damn thing about it. The murder threat was... Kim Martin / @martinimaas : @Safety You will never achieve the highest degree of “safety and security” with user anonymity. What's more important... a potential victim knowing who a potential perpetrator is or the reverse? See it now? I hope so. You should include a “verified personal identity” option and those... @taliaotg : @Safety Great I'll report some far-right extremists who do exactly that right now. @blakmaclives : @Safety @MrXanCap Your policies say one thing, your actions say something else. This tells me the actions are done by people on staff abusing their access. I wonder if @elonmusk thinks this is acceptable. I doubt it. @network_synth : @Safety Cool, so when is Chaya Raichik getting banned? Y'know, since that's literally all she does all day every day in order to directly harm queer people like Nex Benedict. Mehdi Hasan / @mehdirhasan : He went and changed the terms of service to protect an alleged neo-Nazi. Evan McLaren / @evan_r_mclaren : @EyesOnTheRight Totally coincidental that X was moved to make this policy clarification (i.e., change) to make the platform safe and secure for a Nazi! @tweetbynatasha : @Safety I'm curious about how X's new policy on user anonymity will be implemented. Will there be additional measures in place to ensure the protection of users' privacy and prevent the unauthorized sharing of their personal information? @pavldozer : @Safety This doxxing post is still up. Why hasn't it been removed and the user banned? https://x.com/... @gschifanelli : @Safety This is very vague: “this includes context suggesting abusive intent, harassment or incitement to harass as well as distribution of media that may..”! Anyone who doesn't like criticism of someone's policies can claim that a speaker has “abusive intent"( how dare you criticize... Robin / @beneluxtesla : @Safety How is Libs of Tiktok still here then? @pan_dejo_ : @Safety This policy is not enforced or taken seriously by @x @elonmusk @lindayaX or @Safety and I can show at minimum 20 posts that where not found to be in violation of the @x rules with my name, address, phone number and email address on them. Debbie Mathews / @hawksgirl80 : @Safety What they really mean is please don't doxx Elon's friends. Everyone else is fair game. @stealthmedical1 : @Safety We have reported 127 times doxxing and direct emails to twitter safety @Safety @elonmusk and you have done nothing ! With actual death threats towards Jews and abuse of women ?! @ellamae_content : @Safety Also pls bring back adding description to reports.. it will be useful for non-English reports.. most often violations in languages other than English are not acted upon due to the lack of context of folks reviewing these reports!! @againstgrmrs : @Safety How can you post this on the same day you let the biggest abuser on this platform back into their account? Is it supposed to be a slap in the face to all those who @esqueer_ has doxxed? @sikataraeda : @Safety So how about enforcing it on everyone instead of just selectively? Cody Johnston / @drmistercody : @Safety Looking forward to Andy Ngo getting banned oh wait nevermind the owner of the site follows and interacts with him all the time. See also Mediagazer
Context & Ripple Effects
The policy update formalizes the enforcement posture visible when X suspended journalists and researchers over posts identifying Stonetoss. It turns a case-specific moderation action into a broader rule covering identities behind anonymous accounts.
It also changes the practical balance in a service whose prior leadership had fought efforts to unmask users in some circumstances. The central question is now how consistently X distinguishes privacy protection from reporting and public-interest identification.
First-order effects
- X users risk removal for posting a pseudonymous account holder’s real name, including researchers and journalists whose work depends on connecting an account to an alleged operator.
- Anonymous-account holders receive a clearer platform-level protection against identity disclosure, while X gains a stated rule to cite when restricting such posts.
Second-order effects
- Newsrooms, investigators, and civil-society researchers may need to move identity-related reporting off X or publish without naming the account holder on the platform, reducing X’s usefulness for distributing that work.
- The rule puts pressure on X to apply the privacy standard consistently across politically charged cases; uneven enforcement would intensify scrutiny of its moderation decisions.
Third-order effects
- If platforms increasingly treat public identity linkage as prohibited personal-information sharing, control over the distribution layer will shape which investigations can reach mass audiences even when underlying reporting remains available elsewhere.
- The case illustrates a durable conflict at the public-data permission boundary: privacy rules can limit harassment, but broad identity protections can also constrain accountability reporting unless platforms define clear public-interest exceptions.
The trend: Platform safety policies are becoming more consequential as distribution-layer rules determine the reach of identity-based reporting and anonymous speech.