The decision was made around August 18 after messages concerning @Vivek4real_ — an account managed under the name Vivek Sen — reached Nikita Bir, who plays a key role in X's fight against spam and low-quality content. At that time, the account had about 270,000 followers.
Bir stated that it appears one person controlled more than 10 accounts and fraudulently obtained over $250,000 from X's revenue sharing program over the past two years. He also indicated that the matter has been referred to law enforcement.
Blocks followed shortly thereafter. Among the accounts identified in this group were @Bitcoin_Teddy, @BitcoinSapiens, @Kalshibacktest, @polybacktest, and @saylordocs, which were associated with the Documenting Saylor project. X did not publicly disclose all accounts allegedly controlled by this operator.
Allegations of Post Theft
The alleged scheme was simple. Videos and posts created by journalists, YouTube creators, and other X users were reportedly downloaded and reuploaded through larger accounts, sometimes after watermarks or other identifying elements were intentionally cropped out.
This detail is important because X pays rewards to eligible authors partly based on the engagement generated by their posts. In 2026, the company adjusted its system to direct a larger share of revenue to original authors, creating an obvious financial incentive for accounts to pass off repurposed material as their own.
By distributing repurposed material across numerous accounts, the operator could potentially amass millions of views without incurring the costs of producing original reporting, interviews, or videos. This tactic also allows large accounts to directly compete with the individuals who actually created the material.
Journalists Slam "Net Positive" Argument
Gareth Jenkinson, Head of Multimedia at The Block, recounted that he had previously raised issues with Vivek about reposting clips from his show without proper attribution. According to Jenkinson, Vivek argued that such practice provided a "net positive" effect because the additional promotion generated views for media personalities and companies.
However, for content creators, popularity does not automatically substitute for attribution or income. When a large account reposts material and garners audience engagement for it, the original author can lose out on both visibility and money, despite having funded the reporting, filming, or editing.
This struggle has gained particular relevance in the crypto-oriented segment of X, widely known as Crypto Twitter or CT, where accounts engage in an aggressive race to post the latest market news, videos, and commentary as quickly as possible.
X Takes the Fight Beyond Simple Blocking
The social network X's response indicates that industrial-scale content recycling can carry consequences beyond simply losing an account. Bir's decision to refer the matter to law enforcement potentially elevates it from an internal platform issue to one involving potential fraud or copyright infringement.
These blocks also fit into a broader X campaign for 2025–2026 targeting spam, AI-generated chatbot bots, "engagement farms," and reward systems that push users to post vast volumes of low-quality content. Cryptocurrency accounts have repeatedly been caught in these crackdowns, as engagement-driven posting is deeply entrenched across the sector.
The Purge Is Not Over
For smaller creators, a reduction in content farms could mean less competition from reposted material and a greater chance of gaining views, recognition, and revenue for their own work.
The problem is far from solved. Jenkinson and other users note that similar accounts remain active, presenting X with the difficult task of distinguishing coordinated content farms from legitimate aggregation, commentary, and fair use posting.
What happens next depends on whether law enforcement acts on Bir's referral and whether X continues its hunt for such networks. Some disagreed with Bir's call to law enforcement. "Honestly, a bit surprised to see words like 'defrauded' and 'referred to law enforcement' in the context of tweet theft and engagement manipulation. Not sure that escalation is necessary. 'Just blocking them would have been enough,'" wrote user Pledditor in an X post.
The true test will be a measurable outcome: whether original content creators can ultimately gain greater reach and revenue as the platform removes accounts built on recycled material.
end-content
