X permanently banned my 15-year-old account for sharing my own open-source lib
On July 8 I posted about an open-source library I wrote — helix-noise, a divergence-free 3D noise function that returns velocity instead of a value, so you can advect millions of particles with no simulation step (MIT, demos: https://rifmj.github.io/helix-noise). The post itself was fine. Then I replied to it with the GitHub link and three hashtags (#creativecoding #threejs #webgl). Shortly after, my account (@dzhumagulov, registered 2011, no prior violations) was permanently suspended for violating the X Rules — moved to read-only, can't post, like, or create new accounts. I appealed through the official form: explained it's my own MIT-licensed project, no monetization, posted once. The rejection came back from their automated system, and the template literally didn't name the violation — the "specifically:" section was empty. It just says the decision stands and I should "remedy the violations," without saying what they are. So the current state: banned by one automated system, appeal denied by another, and no human has told me what rule I broke. As far as I can tell, "external link + hashtags in a reply" simply pattern-matches to spam. I get that spam detection at X's scale is hard. But sharing your own open-source work is about the most normal developer behavior there is, and there's apparently no path to reach a human reviewer. Curious if others have hit this and whether anything short of going viral actually works.
Discussion Highlights (10 comments)
panny
I guess you're just going to have to wait for a new owner to unban you like Dr. Malone had to do.
AlexRenders
F. odd. half the posts on X are aggressive marketing. perplexing.
foxyv
Welcome to the Kafkaesque world of automated enforcement. > "The Trial" by Franz Kafka is a novel written in 1914 and 1915. It follows Josef K., a bank clerk who is arrested and prosecuted by a mysterious, unreachable authority. Neither he nor the reader ever learns what crime he has committed. As Josef navigates an absurd legal system filled with bizarre encounters and inexplicable procedures, his case consumes his life while remaining perpetually unresolved. The novel, never completed by Kafka, was published posthumously in 1925. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7849
yogibear678142
Posting a link could be considered aggressive behavior. I feel much safer knowing AI is the new judge, jury, and executioner of the public square of the internet.
kentich
My 9 y/o account on Reddit was shadow banned because I shared a URL of my app in subs specifically aimed at sharing apps/side-projects. No warning, no explanation. It was just an execution-style ban. It seems that the social media giants want the audience to feel as if a sword of damocleis is constantly hanging over them. One step out of the line that no one says you nothing about, and you are executed.
jimrandomh
If that's all you'd posted recently, the problem is not likely to be the content you posted. The most likely thing that happened is that you shared an IP address (eg a VPN exit node, or a device with malware on your wifi network) with someone who was banned for good reasons, and got caught in the crossfire.
nchmy
Sorry to hear it. But perhaps your life will be better off without Xitter?
Amir6
My Claude AI account got suspended with zero response to my appeal request (despite the promise of 10 days) and even their backup download features doesn’t not work!
PaiDxng
An empty “specifically” field is the clearest failure here—you can’t ask someone to remedy a violation while withholding the rule, evidence, and any path to human review.
da_grift_shift
Author, your comments in this thread do not follow the HN guidelines, please stop replying to people with AI-generated comments. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html#generated The Claudemade submission text is grating enough to read (it could have been a quarter of the length).