New Competitor Twitter App

Ok I'll bite. In good faith, am asking, what do you mean when you say "disinformation" as you're making it the core selling point of this thing. 1. What do you define as disinformation 2. Who is determining what is disinformation 3. How are people penalised for publishing disinformation The reason I'm asking these 3 questions is for these reasons; 1. Right or left, the definition of what "disinformation" consistently always comes down to "things I don't like and things that are in conflict of the narrative I'm pushing for". You can of course say that there is objective truth to every argument, but then we get into #2. 2. Objective truth largely depends on who is fact checking. e.g. using US and covid related job losses as example. One side says "under our administration there was a record number of jobs created", the other side says "those jobs weren't created, they were just temporarily eliminated because of lockdowns". Technically both are correct, it's just a question of who you ask and what narrative they're trying to push. Unfortunately what we keep seeing from countless examples, is that the majority of the 'fact checking' organisations are unable to stay objective and almost always end up starting to lean in whichever direction supports their donors and companies engaging their services. 3. What should the punishment be for publishing disinformation or misinformation? For example just the other day, New York Times published what can only be called a fluff piece about FTX. I would argue that that is blatant misinformantion designed to misinform the readers. Should they be banned from Twitter for spreading misinformation? At that point we should ban virtually all publications, all politicians and majority of journalists as neither has a spotless record.