For what it's worth, I didn't know what statements were being referred to, and I like to keep up with tech news. There are probably a lot of others in the same boat too - definitely more then there are trolls feigning ignorance about him.

It's probably best to assume good faith from the commenter, especially when their username is "transcoderx"!

> Assume good faith.

As to your claims:

> Musk is known to be anti-LGBT

Since when is pointing to an individual's comments who is gay and criticising them (the person or the comments) "anti-LGBT"? I'd like to see the reasoning for that one. I thought it's because Roth brings up children in questionable comments, an awful lot. YMMV.

The next link's headline is "Elon Musk should apologize for mocking gender pronouns, says group that gave Tesla top LGBTQ-friendly rating" - why? Freedom of speech includes freedom to mock. Anyone wanting, nay, demanding their own pronouns is eminently mockable, trans or not.

Next link's headline is "Elon Musk's Twitter Reinstates Anti-Trans Activists on Same Weekend as Club Q Attacked". Aside from that being a shameless guilt-by-association fallacy, the policy changed after Musk asked the question "Should Twitter offer a general amnesty to suspended accounts, provided that they have not broken the law or engaged in egregious spam?"

Portraying a general amnesty as something targeted seems a tad misleading.

Next headline: “Not content with reactivating accounts that spewed anti-trans content, Musk’s Twitter has now banned a group that organizes to protect people at LGBTQ events from far-right violence.”

I had to do a bit of digging with this one. The banned group, the Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club, claim they were suspended for two tweets (from the link you gave):

> The reason given for its account suspension, an Elm Fork John Brown Gun Club contributor told The New Republic, was that it had violated Twitter rules against “hateful conduct,” with two tweets cited: a reply to the official account of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“Mugging at gun point,” reads the reply to an unspecified CBP post) and another post with what seems like a retort to the perpetual conservative nonjoke about pronouns, “Every queer a riflethem.”

I don't understand why that would lead to suspension.

It turns out that they are part of Antifa and were involved in targeting a conservative activist[1][2]. Perhaps it is linked to tweets like the following by its leader? [3]

> For legal reasons, this is a direct threat. Enjoy your kneecaps while you've got them.

I can't tell. This tweet[4] from Musk in response to another thread by Ngo says:

> That is a disturbing story and very concerning that Twitter took no action, despite clear violation of ToS. Report in this thread for now.

So it seems possible that it may have been because those tweets were seen as threatening somehow, or for other violations that were previously, I'm tempted to write condoned but shall we say, overlooked?

[1] https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1557475321678647297

[2] https://humanevents.com/2022/08/10/meet-the-woman-antifa-mil...

[3] https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1557478306760597504

[4] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1596071799410003969

* He critizised that Yoel advocated for Kids using dating platforms in his PhD thesis. It's a misrepresentation IMO, but the reasoning behind his criticism is not LGBT specific.

* This is about mocking pronouns, not about LGBT people. “I absolutely support trans, but all these pronouns are an esthetic nightmare.” - EM

* He reinstated a lot of accounts that didn't violate the law (free speech). Vice cherry picked some examples that were originally banned for "anti LGBT" tweets.

* Activist account was banned for "hateful conduct". I don't know the context here, but that classification seems reasonable.

* He did delete the pelosi tweet, presumably once he realized it was false.

* The last one is about anti LGBT behavior by employees at Tesla, not by EM himself.