I want to tell everyone who has followed my posts on X over the years what happened.
I did not stop writing.
Nor did I choose to sever my connection with my readers.
In the early morning of September 11, 2026, my X account was suspended.
What had I posted the night before?
Let me set out the sequence of events.
On July 16, 2010, I began publishing on the internet as “The Turntable of Civilization.”
The pen name that came to me then was Kenji Akutagawa.
Around November 2017, an account appeared on Facebook impersonating me under that name—the name I had used for my own writing.
I am convinced that this impersonation is the work of a certain criminal who has subjected me to an almost unbelievable campaign of interference with my visibility in search results since June 2011.
Behind that conviction lie a long history of harm and a previous criminal complaint.
In 2011, I became seriously ill and had to spend eight months in hospital.
Even while I was battling that illness, the interference with my visibility in search results continued.
In 2012, the year after I fully recovered and was discharged, I filed criminal complaints covering this and other harm I had suffered.
During questioning at that time, this individual fully confessed to the online obstruction of my work.
When I consider the present impersonation, I cannot set that history aside.
On September 10, before going to bed, I posted on X.
It was a final warning and notice, written in English, concerning this Facebook impersonation.
My purpose was to alert readers to the account using my original pen name and to make my own position clear.
Then came the following morning.
My own X account was suspended.
I am recording that sequence explicitly.
I warned about the impersonation on the night of September 10.
My own ability to post was cut off in the early morning of September 11.
I did not accept this in silence.
Working with a leading AI system, I organized the sequence of events and prepared appeals in both Japanese and English, clearly stating the facts and my requests.
I scrutinized every expression, refined the wording to leave no room for misunderstanding, and requested a review and a specific explanation.
I submitted four appeals.
All four brought back replies with exactly the same content.
Below is an English translation of the Japanese reply reproduced verbatim in the Japanese edition of this article.
【English translation of X’s reply; the defective wording is retained rather than silently corrected】
This is a notification from Twitter.
We have reviewed the appeal concerning account @sunsetrubdown22.
X’s support team has, due to, determined that no violation of the X Rules has occurred.
Specifically, the details are as follows.
You are violating the rules prohibiting inauthentic behavior.
After reviewing the additional information you provided, we have determined that there are no valid grounds for reversing the original decision in this case.
Therefore, the decision to lock your account will not be reversed.
To remove the restrictions on your account’s functions, please resolve the violation by logging into your account and completing the on-screen steps.
Thank you.
X Support
【End of translation】
I ask my readers to examine this wording for themselves.
What is the Japanese phrase “Xのサポートチームは、により”—literally, “X’s support team has, due to”—supposed to mean?
Immediately after stating that “no violation of the X Rules has occurred,” the reply says, “You are violating the rules prohibiting inauthentic behavior.”
Was there no violation?
Or was there a violation?
The reply cannot consistently explain even that most basic point.
It then says that the decision to lock the account will not be reversed, while instructing me to log in and complete the steps to remove the restrictions.
Yet I was facing a problem that prevented me from even logging in.
How was I supposed to act on that instruction?
Above all, the reply gives no specific explanation of which post or action of mine constituted “inauthentic behavior.”
I had been warning about an account impersonating me under my pen name.
Yet I was confronted with the words “inauthentic behavior,” without any explanation of what they referred to.
It is hardly surprising that this treatment filled me with deep anger.
A single drafting error can be corrected.
But I appealed four times.
And the same wording was returned in response to all four appeals.
Where were the facts I presented examined?
Who checked the contradictions I pointed out?
I do not regard a reply that merely says “we reviewed the additional information,” while providing no specific account of that review, as a response made in good faith.
I was not asking for special treatment.
I wanted the reasons for the action taken against me to be explained in language I could understand.
If an error had been made, I wanted it corrected in light of the facts.
That was the entirety of my request.
Can a company entrusted with the words of people around the world not even explain itself coherently to a single user?
There is a living person on the receiving end of an account suspension.
There are years spent writing, and there are people who have continued to read those words.
A company that takes action to sever that connection has a corresponding responsibility to explain itself.
I decided that I could tolerate no more.
On September 17, I went to my local police station, explained the history of the harm I had suffered, and formally filed a criminal complaint.
The complaint was accepted.
It was the first time I had done so in fourteen years, since 2012.
I did not choose to bury my anger and carry on as though nothing had happened.
I went to the appropriate authorities to report what had happened and took formal action.
The young detective handling my case helped me with the difficulties that followed.
I had been at my wits’ end over canceling my Premium subscription.
Then, when I decided to delete the suspended account and begin posting anew under my real name, I encountered another obstacle: I could not even log in.
The detective readily resolved these problems, which my exchanges with a leading AI system had failed to resolve.
He understood what the person in front of him was struggling with and guided me to a practical solution.
For that, I am sincerely grateful.
A vast corporation that kept sending the same incomprehensible reply to four appeals.
A young detective who addressed my difficulties and resolved them.
I will not forget that difference.
In any event, I had no attachment whatsoever to the ID of the suspended account.
Its significance was entirely different from that of the pen name that came to me when I made my debut as “The Turntable of Civilization” on July 16, 2010.
That pen name carries the feelings with which I began writing.
But there is no reason to bind my words or my life to that account ID.
I decided to delete the old account and make a fresh start under my real name.
And now I continue to publish on X under “MIKIO KISARA　文明のターンテーブル,” a name that combines my real name with the title “The Turntable of Civilization.”
To everyone who has read my posts on X over the years:
This is why my voice may suddenly have seemed to disappear.
I did not disappear.
Nor did I choose silence.
The words I have written do not belong to an account ID.
They belong to my own thought, my own experience, and the years I have devoted to writing.
An account can be suspended, but my ability to think cannot be stopped.
I am putting this sequence of events on the record.
I do not intend to let my anger at X—for answering four appeals with the same contradictory Japanese four times—fade into ambiguity.
And I will keep writing for the readers who are waiting for my words.
Under my real name.
With my own name attached to my own words.