Twitter was being used to disseminate malware and addressed it in a way that hurt another platform without fixing their own. JSFiddle took a reasonable approach that did not affect Twitter and left their product offering intact while punishing bad actors. Twitter slapped a “JSFiddle bad” band-aid on the problem that does nothing to address the problem of Twitter being used to spread malicious content. Instead of using their size to do more Twitter uses it to do less.
I don’t think this was mining malware, I think it was just the wallet address. Twitter has been (badly) playing a cat-and-mouse game with a Cryptocurrency version of a classic 419 scam (i.e. send me money so I can send you back more). Twitter has been fighting it by flagging tweets that post wallet IDs, so the scammers have been finding other ways to obfuscate the wallet IDs, like this.
I may be misinterpreting them but from the "wallet codes are ok" part it sounded like they weren't banning them.
If by shadow ban they mean the link is completely inaccessible to other users then I'll agree that they were doing their part and banning links to their site was excessive.
"Due to the nature of JSFiddle, anyone can post anything", therefore "wallet codes are ok" since "anyone can post anything".
A shadow ban normally means that you, the creator, can see your content, but nobody else can. So them shadow banning people who post wallet codes is the direct opposite of allowing wallet codes.
> I asked Twitter if they they could help out and ban twitter accounts that were posting scam tweets that included links to the rouge fiddles.
So they basically sent a message to Twitter saying "We're knowingly hosting malware and we don't intend to remove it, here are some examples"?