Elon Musk intensifies efforts against researchers who disclosed that he is not Adrian Dittman.

The pair of researchers who played a key role in uncovering the true identity of Adrian Dittmann, an X user mistakenly thought to be Elon Musk, are now being requested to remove additional posts regarding the issue after facing a suspension for their reporting the previous week.

Ryan Fae and maia arson crimew, the pair who aided journalist Jacqueline Sweet in her piece at the Spectator, titled “The Real Adrian Dittmann,” both received notifications on Monday that they would be forced to delete specific posts referencing Dittmann.

In Fae's situation, it was claimed that two posts simply referencing Dittmann's name violated X's policies.

For crimew, a post that didn’t even mention Dittmann’s name was ordered to be removed, while a second post linking to the Spectator’s piece was also flagged.

The new complaints from X come after crimew and Fae were suspended for writing an article of their own offering a deep dive into how they discovered Dittmann.

The sharing of links to both their article and Sweet's was also prohibited.

The suspensions, which included Sweet for her contribution, resulted in the trio being banned from X for a period of 30 days due to alleged breaches of the policies regarding the sharing of private information. Fae and crimew contested this ruling and were later notified that their bans had been reduced to just seven days. However, as their suspensions were nearing completion, they were approached by X with requests to remove additional posts.

The report uncovered that Dittmann, contrary to what many believed, was not Musk but rather a German superfan of the X owner residing in Fiji.

Interestingly, X has lifted its ban on links related to the coverage of Dittmann, even though it continues to impose restrictions on the two.

In a comment to the Daily Dot, crimew contended that their suspension highlighted the extent to which "childish moderation on X has deteriorated under Musk's leadership."

"Allowing a week to pass during your month-long suspension of journalists before initiating a second round—just as the story's interest is fading—and compelling them to erase even more content is utterly irrational," crimew stated. "This is particularly absurd considering that this second wave of deletions involves posts that only reference information Dittmann had previously disclosed on X, along with posts that don't violate any rules whatsoever."

In additional comments, crimew also refuted claims that their reporting had in any manner doxxed Dittmann.

“Crimew stated, ‘The original stories don't qualify as doxing either. Demonstrating that an individual of public interest, who uses their full legal name online, is genuinely who they assert to be is far from being considered doxing.’”

"They remarked, 'This is merely trivial censorship, utilizing one of the most inconsistently enforced rules on X as a convenient excuse.'"

Despite the crackdown, other outlets that covered and shared the Dittmann discovery on X, including the right-leaning New York Post, have not been suspended.

Both Sweet and Fae have not removed their posts and continue to be suspended. In contrast, crimew had their account restored after deleting the flagged posts during an interview with the Daily Dot.

I was compelled to remove a total of four tweets.

— maia 🐈 crimew 🏴 (@awawawhoami) January 13, 2025

Fae finds the perplexing situation to be completely expected.

“Fae expressed to the Daily Dot that the blatant targeting of journalists by Musk’s X remains deeply concerning. ‘For a platform that prides itself on promoting free speech, it’s completely nonsensical to delete even the slightest references to an article by its own writers,’ she stated.”

In an op-ed for the Intercept, Sweet said she believed her ban was ultimately about Musk controlling the flow of information.

It is still uncertain whether Fae and Sweet will be able to recover their X accounts without removing the tweets that Musk wishes to eliminate.