WhalePanda, a widely-followed Twitter account that belongs to a user who’s well-known for being a Bitcoin (BTC) maximalist, has suggested that the @Bitcoin Twitter handle should be suspended. Several other known BTC supporters seemingly believe the same, and have campaigned for it.
According to WhalePanda, the @Bitcoin account “was sold” which is reportedly against Twitter’s terms of service (ToS). The “Magical Crypto Friends” member believes that the user(s) managing the @Bitcoin handle are “actively involved with defrauding people.”
The @Bitcoin twitter account should be suspended like the @internet account.— WhalePanda (@WhalePanda) April 21, 2019
The account was sold which is against ToS.
The account is actively involved with defrauding people. It really is that simple.https://t.co/Innp81a2GW
Jimmy Song, a prominent Bitcoin developer, recently conducted a survey via Twitter, in which he asked his followers what action the microblogging platform’s management should take against the owner of the account. Notably, 54% or the majority of those responding said the account should be suspended.
The @bitcoin account should be— Jimmy Song (호들놋) (@jimmysong) April 20, 2019
Let The Market Decide, Or Call For a Ban?
However, a significant 30% of users recommended that those in charge of the @Bitcoin handle and the account itself be “left alone.” Commenting on the matter, Larry Cermak, the Head Analyst at TheBlock, a cryptocurrency and blockchain-related news outlet, argued:
Today I learned (TIL) It’s unpopular to think that @Bitcoin shouldn’t be banned. I don’t give a f**k about Bitcoin Cash and support Bitcoin but it’s subjective, in my opinion (IMO), to argue that they are impersonating a brand. Why not just let the market decide instead of advocating for banning?
While well-known BTC supporters have been contacting Twitter's management to get the @Bitcoin account banned, the owner of the handle has been reaching out to ask about a supposed shadow ban that's limiting its reach. The account's owner has also accused Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey of "conspiring" with BTC supporters. Dorsey has also been accused by @Bitcoin of not communicating professionally and effectively to help Bitcoin.com resolve important issues related to their use of Twitter.
Wow, @jack still conspiring with BTC maximalists to reduce the influence of my account, and still ignoring my attempts at communication.— Bitcoin (@Bitcoin) April 21, 2019
Very inappropriate for the CEO of Twitter, esp considering the conflict of interest w/ his investment in @lightninghttps://t.co/AclTRnH5Zm pic.twitter.com/pVWcafAMTb
A tweet revealed by the account seems to show Dorsey answered a user's query on banning the @Bitcoin account by asking what the user recommended Twitter did with the account. As crypto enthusiasts know, the account is pro-Bitcoin Cash (BCH), a fork of the BTC network. The CEO of Bitcoin.com, Roger Ver, is a well-known BCH proponent who has been arguing it's the "real" version of Bitcoin, claiming it's more aligned with Satoshi Nakamoto's whitepaper.
If the circulating screenshot showing Dorsey's reply wasn't adulterated, it may represent a conflict of interest for the social media platform's CEO, as he has invested in the development of Bitcoin's layer-two scaling solution, the Lightning Network.
Bitcoin.org Forked Last Year, To Launch Community-Maintained Bitcoin Site
In early August 2018, Bitcoin.org was forked to launch what’s considered among some members of the crypto industry to be a neutral and “community-maintained” Bitcoin website. Announcing the launch of btcinformation.org, on August 4th 2018 via Twitter, David A. Harding, a BTC supporter, remarked:
“Launch announcement for http://btcinformation.org , a community-maintained fork of Bitcoin(dot)org with advertisements removed and third-party trackers disabled. I've already had the pleasure making some small contributions. https://btcinformation.org/en/posts/announcing-btcinformation.html.”
At the time of the announcement last year, the developers of btcinformation.org had argued that the owners and maintainers of Bitcoin.org had intentionally taken “unilateral actions” - which might not have been in the best interests of the BTC community. The managers of Bitcoin.org were also accused of acting “without the consent” of the larger crypto community.