At Curianic, our mission has always been clear: to publish original, independent content on science, lifestyle, consulting, technology, and culture. Our editorial voice is respectful, non-political, and committed to fact-based quality. We do not use bots, automation, or artificial amplification.
Yet recently, our account on X (formerly Twitter) was suspended without warning. The decision did not arise from anything Curianic published or did — but from harassment by fraudulent accounts. In an irony that undermines trust in digital platforms, instead of removing the abusers, X punished the victim.
The Spam We Faced
For several weeks, Curianic was targeted by fraudulent accounts using a manipulative cycle:
- They followed Curianic,
- sent messages soliciting money,
- then unfollowed,
- only to repeat the process.
We unfollowed these suspicious accounts. But before we had the chance to formally report them, something striking happened: the scam activity suddenly went quiet. Then, only a day later — right after we published our editorial “The Creator Paradox: Why Professionals and Everyday Users All Became Digital Creators”— our account was suspended without warning.
The fraudulent accounts, however, remained active.
The Harm Done by X
X’s enforcement action did not just silence an account — it erased our work. Along with the suspension, all Curianic posts on X were deleted.
The official notice declared that @curianic_com was suspended for “breaking the rules.” This is a serious statement that implies misconduct. Yet all Curianic posts were respectful, non-political, and compliant with community standards.
Since its start, Curianic has suffered repeated attempts by scammers to silence it. Our webhosting service and other social media platforms protected us. X did the opposite: it erased authentic work while leaving fraud unchecked.
Instead of targeting those who run scams, X’s system erased the work of an independent publisher whose only “fault” was to resist fraudulent activity. In effect, the victim was treated as the offender. This is the opposite of justice.
No platform should announce “rule violations” against a creator — and simultaneously delete all their content — without first producing evidence, context, and due process. To do otherwise is to damage reputation, destroy legitimate work, and confuse readers. In the language of fairness: a judgment without evidence is no judgment at all — it is punishment without a trial.
Why This Matters
This episode is bigger than Curianic. Automated enforcement systems often punish legitimate voices while allowing fraud to flourish. Independent creators and small publishers are especially vulnerable: instead of protection, they risk erasure.
Authenticity should be rewarded, not penalized. A platform that allows scams but silences independent publishers damages trust not only in itself, but in digital media overall.
Reassurance to Our Readers
Curianic remains fully active at https://curianic.com— and remains active across other social media platforms, except X for now.
Our brand is safe, trusted, and committed to delivering meaningful content. What happened on X reflects flaws in its system, not in our work.
We will continue publishing original editorials, consulting insights, and cultural reflections — across channels where authentic creators are respected.
Conclusion
Platforms hold immense power over public discourse. With that power comes responsibility: to protect creators, not punish them.
Curianic stands firm. We will not be silenced by automated errors or unfair suspensions. Authenticity matters, and we will keep publishing — because our readers deserve it.
